Sanchez v. GROUNDS et al

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING 16 Report and Recommendations and FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants motion for summary judgment (docket no. 13) is GRANTED as to all other claims in the lawsuit and action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 3/30/2015. (sm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
EDUARDO SANCHEZ

§

v.

§

WARDEN DAWN GROUNDS, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14cv64

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Eduardo Sanchez, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42
U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights in the Texas Department
of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division. This Court ordered that the case be referred
to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended
Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate
Judges. As Defendants, Sanchez named Warden Dawn Grounds (now known as Dawn Merchant),
Warden Jeffrey Calfee, Major Wade Alexander, Lt. Charles Howard, Sgt. Corvette Phillips, Captain
Frederick Gooden, Officers April Foster, Bennie Ware, Shaylon Allen, counsel substitutes Amanda
Jordan and Sheila Forte, and the Telford Unit Grievance Department.
The Defendants Merchant, Calfee, Howard, Phillips, Forte, Ware, Allen, and the Unit
Grievance Department filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and a motion for
summary judgment based on failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Sanchez filed responses
to these motions.
After review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report on February 5, 2015,
recommending the Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim be granted as to four
of the Plaintiff’s claims, and that in the alternative, these four claims be dismissed as frivolous. The

1

Magistrate Judge further recommended the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on
failure to exhaust administrative remedies be granted as to all remaining claims in the lawsuit.
Sanchez received a copy of the Report on February 10, 2015, and filed a motion for extension
of time in which to file objections, which was granted until March 24, 2015. Although the parties
have had ample time to object to the Magistrate Judge’s Report, no objections have been received;
accordingly, the parties are barred from de novo review by the district judge of those findings,
conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review
of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court.
Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge.
Upon such review, the Court has determined the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See
United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243
(1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is
“clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). It is accordingly
ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 16) is hereby ADOPTED as
the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim (docket no. 7)
is hereby GRANTED as to the Plaintiff’s claims that: (1) his counsel substitutes did not assist him;
(2) he was not allowed to review the disciplinary audio tape; (3) he was not allowed to question
witnesses or to leave his cell; and (4) he did not receive answers on all of his I-60's. These four
claims are DISMISSED as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted. It is further
ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on failure to exhaust
administrative remedies (docket no. 13) is GRANTED as to all other claims in the lawsuit and the
above-styled civil action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Finally, it is

2

ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
DENIED.
SIGNED this 30th day of March, 2015.

____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3