Miller v. Collier ( 2019 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ROBERT MILLER, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Case No. 6:19-CV-445-JDK-JDL § BRIAN COLLIER, WILLIAM JONES, § LORENZO BUSTOS, DEANNA § PEARSON, and ABRAHAM VEGA, § § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On October 7, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 6), recommending that the action be dismissed with prejudice for purposes of in forma pauperis proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A return receipt indicating delivery to Plaintiff was received by the Clerk on October 15, 2019 (Docket No. 7). This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days). Here, Plaintiff did not file objections in the prescribed period. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews his legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law’). Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. The Court therefore adopts the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 6) as the findings of thisCourt. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report (Docket No. 6) be ADOPTED and that the above-styled civil action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for purposes of in forma pauperis proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). All pending motions are DENIED as MOOT. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 2) is DENIED. This Order does not bar refiling of this lawsuit without seeking in forma pauperis status and upon payment of the full $400.00 filing fee. Plaintiff may resume the lawsuit if he pays the entire filing fee of $400 within fifteen (15) days after the entry of the Final Judgment. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 12th day of November, 2019. qn 2 Kode JERYMY D RERNODIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE