Jones v. Denmark et al

Filing 65

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, re: 63 Report and Recommendations. Motion for Summary Judgment 55 is granted. Claims 1-10 asserted by La Tidtus Jones are dismissed without prejudice. Claims 11-13 are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Chief District Judge Louis Guirola, Jr on 8/1/16 (PKS)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
LA TIDTUS JONES

PLAINTIFF

v.

CAUSE NO. 1:14CV258-LG-JCG

SUPERINTENDENT JOHNNIE
DENMARK, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT is the Report and Recommendation [63] entered by
United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo in this lawsuit filed by La Tidtus
Jones pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jones has not objected to the Report and
Recommendation. After reviewing the record in this matter and the applicable law,
the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted as the
opinion of this Court.
DISCUSSION
On July 3, 2014, Jones filed this lawsuit asserting thirteen claims pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Jones alleges that his First, Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth
Amendment rights were violated during his incarceration. Judge Gargiulo entered
a Report and Recommendation on July 5, 2016, in which he recommended that the
Motion for Summary Judgment [55] filed by the defendants be granted due to Jones’
failure to exhaust administrative remedies as to claims 1-10. Judge Gargiulo also
conducted a sua sponte review of claims 11-13 and recommended that those claims
should be dismissed with prejudice. Judge Gargiulo also recommended that Jones’
request that he be appointed counsel should be denied. Jones has not responded or

objected to the Report and Recommendation.
Where no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge’s report and
recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions
of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection
is made.”). In such cases, the Court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear
error on the face of the record. Douglass v. United Serv. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415,
1420 (5th Cir. 1996).
Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that Judge Gargiulo’s
Report and Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. As a
result, the defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. Claims 1-10 are
dismissed without prejudice due to Jones’ failure to exhaust administrative
remedies. Claims 11-13 are dismissed with prejudice. Jones’ request for
appointment of counsel is denied.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and
Recommendation [63] entered by United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo
is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion for
Summary Judgment [55] filed by the defendants is GRANTED. Claims 1-10
asserted by La Tidtus Jones are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Claims
11-13 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 1st day of August, 2016.
-2-

s/

Louis Guirola, Jr.

LOUIS GUIROLA, JR.
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

-3-