Flores v. United States Attorney General et al
Filing
7
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by District Judge Debra M. Brown on 7/13/15. (jtm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
ERIC FLORES
PLAINTIFF
V.
NO. 4:15-cv-00048-DMB-JMV
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
GENERAL; and FEDERAL BUREAU
OF INVESTIGATION
DEFENDANTS
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On April 20, 2015, Plaintiff Eric Flores filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and a
“Motion to Transfer Multidistrict Litigation to the District of Columbia Pursuant to 27 U.S.C. &
[sic] for Coordinated and Consolidated Pretrial Proceedings by Judicial Panel for Multidistrict
Litigation.” Doc. #2; Doc. #3.
On June 3, 2015, U.S. Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that: (1) Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis be granted; (2) Plaintiff’s motion to transfer be denied; and (3) “this action be dismissed
as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).” Doc. # 6 at 6. The R&R warned that
“any … objections [to the R&R] are required to be in writing and must be filed within fourteen
days of this date. Failure to timely file written objections … will bar an aggrieved party, except
upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal unobjected-to proposed factual findings
and legal conclusions accepted by the district court.” Id. at 7 (citing Douglass v. United Servs.
Auto. Assoc., 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996)). A copy of the R&R was mailed to the pro se
plaintiff via United States Postal Service on June 3, 2015.
More than fourteen days have elapsed since service of the R&R and no objection thereto
has been filed or served by any party. Accordingly, this Court’s review of the R&R is limited to
plain error. See Molina-Uribe v. U.S., No. B:97-97, 2009 WL 3535498, at *15 (S.D. Tex. Sep.
10, 2009) (“In the absence of plain error, a party’s failure to object timely to a Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation waives any right to further judicial review of that
decision.”) (citing Douglass, 79 F.3d at 1428–29).
The Court has reviewed the R&R and has found no plain error. Accordingly, the R&R
[6] is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. Thus, (1) Plaintiff’s motion to
proceed in forma pauperis [2] is GRANTED; (2) Plaintiff’s motion to transfer [3] is DENIED;
and (3) this case is DISMISSED as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
SO ORDERED, this 13th day of July, 2015.
/s/ Debra M. Brown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?