Soloman v. Moreland et al

Filing 8

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Ordering action is Dismissed Without Prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 8/11/2016. (sm, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION DeMARCO SOLOMAN § v. § JANET MORELAND, ET AL. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15cv193 MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT The Plaintiff DeMarco Soloman, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. 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. Soloman was ordered to pay an initial partial filing fee of $8.23, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1915(b). When he did not comply with this order, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending the lawsuit be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Soloman filed objections to the Report stating he has “no income whatsoever.” However, his application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis states he receives money from his parents and the attached inmate trust account data sheet shows he received deposits to his account in five of the preceding six months, which deposits amounted to $250.00. He has not shown any valid basis for his failure to pay the statutory initial partial filing fee of $8.23. Soloman’s objections are without merit. The Court has conducted a careful de novo review of those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings and recommendations to which the Plaintiff objected. See 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) 1 (district judge shall “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”) Upon such de novo review, . the Court has determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct and the Plaintiff’s objections are without merit. It is accordingly ORDERED the Plaintiff’s objections are overruled and the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 5) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. It is further ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 11th day of August, 2016. ____________________________________ ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?