Hartfield v. Seringi et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that this civil rights action be dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 1/3/17. (mrp, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
DEVON L. HARTFIELD

§

VS.

§

SERINGI, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO.

1:16-CV-468

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Devon L. Hartfield, a prisoner confined at the Larry Gist State Jail Facility, filed this
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Warden Seringi, Assistant Warden Ortega,
Assistant Regional Director Steve Massie, and Food Service Captain Florence Morris.
The court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Keith F. Giblin, United States
Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, 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 dismissing the civil rights action pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge, along with the record and the pleadings. Petitioner filed a “Notice to the Court,”
which the court liberally construes as 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, the court concludes the
objections are without merit. Plaintiff alleges he missed a meal because he was allergic to the eggs

he was served, and he was not given a replacement food tray. However, missing a single meal does
not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. Berry v. Brady, 192 F.3d 504, 508 (5th Cir. 1999).
ORDER
Accordingly, plaintiff’s objections (document no. 7) are OVERRULED. The findings of
fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge
(document no. 4) is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with
the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
SIGNED this the 3 day of January, 2017.

____________________________
Thad Heartfield
United States District Judge

2