Barnes v. Unnamed Defendant

Filing 125

MEMORANDUM ORDER overruling objections and adopting 114 Report and Recommendation. Order also denying 123 Motion for evidentiary hearing. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 6/26/17. (tkd, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
GEORGEBAY BARNES

§

VS.

§

UNNAMED DEFENDANTS, et al.,

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-18

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND
ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, Georgebay Barnes, a prisoner formerly confined at the Mark Stiles Unit, proceeding
pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against
several defendants.
The Court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate
Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this Court.
The Magistrate Judge recommends defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted.
The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record, and pleadings. Plaintiff filed
objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. This requires a
de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and applicable law. See FED. R. CIV.
P. 72(b).
After careful consideration, the Court finds the objections lacking in merit.1 Plaintiff has
failed to demonstrate through competent summary judgment evidence that there is a genuine dispute
of material fact. Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to his claims of
a failure to protect and placement in administrative segregation. Plaintiff has also not demonstrated
extraordinary circumstances that would warrant waiver of the exhaustion requirement. Finally,

1
The bulk of plaintiff’s objections state he seeks the assistance of either a federal or state prosecutor. In
addition, plaintiff argues the findings of the Magistrate Judge in the Report and Recommendation are “unjust” and
are the result of judicial misconduct. Plaintiff also requests a hearing before the District Judge.

plaintiff has not demonstrated the defendants were personally involved in the alleged
constitutional violations.
Accordingly, plaintiff’s objections are overruled. The findings of fact and conclusions of
law of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. A
final

judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s

recommendations. Plaintiff’s motion for evidentiary hearing (docket entry no. 123) is also denied.

SIGNED this the 26 day of June, 2017.

____________________________
Thad Heartfield
United States District Judge

2