United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division
J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge.
After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 15.) In his objections Plaintiff expresses dissatisfaction with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and seeks legal advice about the next step he should take in this case, including how to appeal the recommendation. (Doc. no. 15.) It appears to the Court that Plaintiff believes that his entire case has been dismissed. (Id.)
First, the Court does not provide litigants with legal advice because it does not have a "license to serve as de facto counsel for a party...." In re Unsolicited Letters to Federal Judges, 120 F.Supp.2d 1073, 1074 (S.D. Ga. 2000) (citation omitted). Second, the Court also reminds Plaintiff that he may not appeal the Magistrate Judge's recommendation directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. (See doc. no. 14, p. 2.) Third, the Court also reminds Plaintiff that it has not dismissed his entire case. Indeed, the Court has allowed Plaintiff to proceed with his claims against Defendants Andrews and Haygen for deliberate indifference for failure to intervene under the Eighth Amendment. (See doc. no. 12.) As explained by the Magistrate Judge in his January 21, 2015 Order, the United States Marshal is in the process of effecting service on those Defendants. (Id. at 3.) Because discovery must be completed within 140 days, Plaintiff should focus his efforts on initiating discovery as soon as the last of the two remaining defendants files an answer.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES Defendants ASMP, Russell, Porter, Jackson, and Conley from this case, and DISMISSES Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference ...