Jones v. Shelby County Sheriff Department et al

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING 14 Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's 3 Complaint is Dismissed Without Prejudice. Signed by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on January 28, 2025. (Mays, Samuel)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
WESTERN DIVISION
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

DAVID TYRON JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
SHELBY COUNTY SHERIFF
DEPARTMENT and FORMER SHELBY
COUNTY SHERIFF BILL OLDHAM,
Defendants.

No. 2:24-cv-02859-SHM-tmp

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by
Chief United States Magistrate Judge Tu M. Pham on December 18,
2024.

(ECF

No.

14.)

In

the

Report

and

Recommendation,

the

Magistrate Judge recommends that pro se Plaintiff David Tyron
Jones’s

complaint

be

dismissed

without

prejudice

because

Plaintiff has failed to file an in forma pauperis application or
pay the civil filing fee, despite a warning that failure to
comply would result in dismissal. (See id.)
Pursuant
“[w]ithin

14

to

Federal

days

after

Rule

of

Civil

being

served

Procedure
with

a

72(b)(2),

copy

of

the

recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific
written

objections

to

the

proposed

recommendations.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2).

findings

and

After initially being served on a previous address, the
Report and Recommendation was re-mailed on January 8, 2025, to
the updated address Plaintiff provided the Court on November 22,
2024 (ECF No. 12), which appears to be a shelter.
On January 27, 2025, the Court received a letter from
Plaintiff. (ECF No. 15.) From his letter, it appears that Mr.
Jones is suffering from a significant mental health condition,
has been incarcerated, and is now located at the Shelby County
Jail at 201 Poplar Avenue, Memphis, Tennessee. (See id.) His
letter did not contain an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation. (See id.)
No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been
filed, and the time for filing objections has expired. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2), 6(d), 72(b)(2). “When no timely objection is
filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear
error

on

the

face

of

the

record

in

order

to

accept

the

recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee notes.
On clear-error review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation
(ECF No. 14) in its entirety. Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 3)
is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED this 28th day of January, 2025.
/s/ Samuel H. Mays, Jr.
SAMUEL H. MAYS, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2