United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Southern Division
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION , DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION , DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION
FOR JOINDER OF PARTY , DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO
AMEND PLEADING , AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT 
SULEYMAN OZERDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff David
Jackson's Objection  and Supplemental Objection 
to the Report and Recommendation  of United States
Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo, entered in this case on
November 17, 2016, regarding four pending motions: (1)
Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction ; (2)
Plaintiff's Motion for Joinder of Party ; (3)
Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Pleading ; and (4)
Defendants Marshall Fisher's and Jacquelyn Banks'
Motion for Summary Judgment . Based upon his review of
Defendants' Motion , related pleadings, and relevant
legal authority, the Magistrate Judge recommended that
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment  be granted
and that this case be dismissed. R. & R.  at 2.
Magistrate Judge Gargiulo also recommended that
Plaintiff's motions should be denied. Id.
filed his Objection  to the Report and Recommendation
 on December 2, 2016, and was permitted to file a
Supplemental Objection  on December 22, 2016. After
thoroughly reviewing Plaintiff's Objections , ,
the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation ,
the four pending motions, the record, and relevant legal
authority, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Objections
,  should be overruled and that the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation  should be adopted
as the finding of the Court. Plaintiff's motions should
be denied, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 
should be granted, and this case should be dismissed without
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
is currently in the custody of the Mississippi Department of
Corrections (“MDOC”) and is incarcerated in the
South Mississippi Correctional Institution
(“SMCI”). Compl.  at 4. Plaintiff filed a
Complaint  in this Court on June 10, 2016, pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983, naming Marshall Fisher, the MDOC
Commissioner, Jacquelyn Banks, the SMCI Superintendent, and
Centurion, a medical services provider, as Defendants.
Id. at 2. Plaintiff alleges that he is not receiving
any treatment for his medical conditions, including
gastroesophageal reflux disease, degenerative joint disease,
major depression, and Hepatitis C, which Plaintiff claims he
was exposed to while incarcerated at SMCI. Id. at
4-7. On the same date as the Complaint  was filed,
Plaintiff filed the Motion for Preliminary Injunction 
requesting an order directing Defendants to provide Plaintiff
with necessary medical care. Mot. Prelim. Inj.  at 3.
subsequently filed the Motion for Joinder of Party ,
seeking to add “Dr. Deese, ” a physician employed
by Centurion, as a Defendant. Plaintiff also filed the Motion
to Amend Pleading , seeking to add a claim regarding the
service of his meals by unsupervised inmates. Defendants have
not filed any response to Plaintiff's pending motions.
to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff had previously accumulated
three qualifying dismissals, or “strikes, ” for
bringing past unsuccessful and frivolous civil actions under
the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 42
U.S.C. 1915. R. & R.  at 2. Under the PLRA, Plaintiff
is only permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in
future civil actions or appeals if he is “under
imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g). Despite having three strikes, Plaintiff was
permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in this suit
because the Court “could not definitely state that
Plaintiff did not meet the imminent danger exception to the
three-strikes rule.” R. & R.  at 2; Order 
Banks and Fisher filed this Motion for Summary Judgment 
on October 6, 2016, arguing that Plaintiff's case should
be dismissed due to his failure to exhaust administrative
remedies as required by the PLRA. Mem. Supp. Mot. Summ. J.
 at 2-3. Defendants point to Plaintiff's Complaint
, in which he admits that he did not participate in the
two-step MDOC Administrative Remedy Program
(“ARP”) regarding his grievances because
“[it] would be fruitless because I have already talked
to the medical administrator, and was denied.” Compl.
 at 3. Defendants also submitted the Affidavit [23-1] of
Joseph Cooley, the custodian of the ARP records at SMCI, who
states that the program has no record of Plaintiff's
alleged exposure and contraction of Hepatitis C or his claim
of the denial of medical treatment. Cooley Aff. [23-1] at 1.
Plaintiff did not file a response to the Motion for Summary
Judgment . However, Plaintiff did file an Exhibit List
 and an Attachment  “to be offered as evidence
in this case.” Exh. List  at 1.
Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation  on
November 17, 2016, recommending that Plaintiff's
conditions-of-confinement case be dismissed without
prejudice. R. & R.  at 2. The Magistrate Judge
determined that dismissal of this suit is mandatory under the
PLRA because Plaintiff failed to exhaust the available
administrative remedies prior to filing the lawsuit.
Id. at 1. The Magistrate Judge recommended that
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment  be granted
and that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction
 be denied. Id. at 8.
Magistrate Judge further recommended that Plaintiff's
Motion for Joinder of Party  be denied as futile because
Plaintiff's § 1983 claims regarding medical
treatment are barred. Id. at 8-9. The Magistrate
Judge also recommended that Plaintiff's Motion to Amend
Pleading  be denied because the proposed new claim
regarding food service does not qualify for the imminent
danger exception to the three-strikes rule and is therefore
precluded by the PLRA. Id. at 9.
filed a written Objection  to the Report and
Recommendation  on December 2, 2016. On December 22,
2016, the Court permitted Plaintiff to file a Supplemental
Objection . Defendants have not responded to the
Objections , .