Davis v. Santos et al

Filing 117

ORDER ADOPTING 116 Report and Recommendations and DENYING 95 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Venerio Santos. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/21/2018. (klh2)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
WILLIE DAVIS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
VENERIO SANTOS,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 15-CV-55-NJR-DGW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENSTENGEL, District Judge:
Plaintiff Willie Davis is proceeding on an Eighth Amendment claim against
Defendant Venerio Santos in which he alleges that Dr. Santos was deliberately
indifferent to his serious medical needs while he was incarcerated at Centralia
Correctional Center (Docs. 1, 5). Dr. Santos filed a motion for summary judgment on the
merits of Davis’s claim on December 19, 2017 (Doc. 95). Magistrate Judge Donald G.
Wilkerson entered a Report and Recommendation on September 5, 2018, in which he
recommended denying Dr. Santos’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 116). Neither
party filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation by the deadline.
Because no party has filed an objection, the Court need not undertake de novo
review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.”) (emphasis added). See also Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140 (1985); Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 741 (7th Cir. 1999); Video
Page 1 of 2

Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1986). Instead, the Court will review
the Report and Recommendation for clear error. Id. at 739. The Court may then “accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The undersigned has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation and
fully agrees with Magistrate Judge Wilkerson’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Accordingly the Reported and Recommendation (Doc. 116) is ADOPTED in its entirety,
and Defendant Venerio Santos’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 95) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: September 21, 2018
____________________________
NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL
United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2