Summary
holding an accused's entrance into the ARD program barred his § 1983 claims
Summary of this case from McIntosh v. CristOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:CV-11-1771
12-26-2012
ANTONELLO BOLDRINI, Plaintiff, v. MARTIN R. WILSON, et al., Defendants.
(JUDGE CAPUTO)
(MAGISTRATE JUDGE BLEWITT)
ORDER
NOW, this 26th day of December, 2012, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Magistrate Judge Blewitt's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 46) is ADOPTED.
(A) Defendants Barrett, Bell, Doe, Johnson, Shaw, and Wilson's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Doc. 7) is GRANTED.(2) The Motion to Reinstate, Consolidate, and for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 32) is DENIED as moot. (3) The Motion to Strike Defendants' Response (Doc. 36) is DENIED as moot. (4) The Motion for a Second Extension of Time to File Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Reinstate, Consolidate, and for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 38) is DENIED as moot. (5) The Motion to Strike Defendants' Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Reinstate, Consolidate, and for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 54) is DENIED as moot. (6) The Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 57) is DENIED as moot.
(B) Defendant Ponce's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. 12) is GRANTED.
(C) Plaintiff Antonello Boldrini's constitutional claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
(D) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state-law claims and those claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.
______________________
A. Richard Caputo
United States District Judge