Ross v. Alford et al

Filing 25

ORDER overruling Plaintiff's objections and adopting the magistrate judge's 22 Report and Recommendation. Defendant's 20 Motion for summary judgment is granted. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 9/12/2018. (bjc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
RICKY EUGENE ROSS

§

VS.

§

RICHARD D. ALFORD, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-330

ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Ricky Eugene Ross, a former prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,
filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Richard D. Alford, Aaron
Tompkins, Vivian Davis, Marilyn Harmon, Brenda Grogan, and Monica Goodman.
The court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States
Magistrate Judge, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The
Magistrate Judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge.
The Magistrate Judge recommends granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge, along with the record and the pleadings. Plaintiff filed objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and
the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration of all the pleadings and
the relevant case law, the court concludes that plaintiff’s objections lack merit. The defendants are
entitled to summary judgment because plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies before
filing this action, as required 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). In addition, the competent summary judgment

evidence does not demonstrate that plaintiff was exposed to an unreasonably high level of
environmental tobacco smoke, or that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious
medical needs by allowing plaintiff to be exposed to environmental tobacco smoke. Therefore, the
defendants are also entitled to summary judgment on the merits of plaintiff’s claims.
ORDER
Accordingly, plaintiff’s objections (docket entry #24) are OVERRULED. The findings of
fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the Magistrate
Judge (docket entry #22) is ADOPTED. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (docket entry
#20) is GRANTED. A final judgment will be entered in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s
recommendation.

So ORDERED and SIGNED September 12, 2018.

____________________________
Ron Clark, Senior District Judge

2