DeLaneuville v. Dinvaut ( 2024 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA RONNIE PAUL DELANEUVILLE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 24-1549 BRIDGET A. DINVAUT, ET AL. SECTION: D(8) ORDER AND REASONS The Court, having considered Plaintiff Ronnie Paul DeLaneuville’s Complaint,! the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge,” and the failure of the Plaintiff to file any objection to the Report and Recommendation,? approves the Report and Recommendation and adopts it as its opinion in this matter. In doing so, the Court notes that it has construed Plaintiff Ronnie Paul DeLaneuville’s pro se pleading liberally.4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims alleged against Defendants Bridget Dinvaut and Mike Tregre be DISMISSED without prejudice as malicious, frivolous, and/or for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted pursuant 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915 and 1915A. New Orleans, Louisiana, November 19, 2024. Vette WENDY B. NITTER United States District Judge TR. Doe. 4. 2R. Doe. 13. 3 Objections were due November 12, 2024. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court has allowed additional time for objections. None have been filed as of the date of this Order and Reasons. The Court further recognizes that Plaintiff failed to respond to the Magistrate Judge’s Order to Show Cause dated August 28, 2024, giving Plaintiff until September 25, 2024 to provide further factual basis of his claim. As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has still not responded to that August Order. 4 See Coleman v. United States, 912 F.3d 824, 828 (6th Cir. 2019).