Muldrow v. Walker et al

Filing 8

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 6 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 1/4/17. (mrm, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ELBERT MULDROW § v. § CAPTAIN WALKER, ET AL. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15cv204 MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT The Plaintiff Elbert Muldrow, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. This Court referred the case 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. Orders granting in forma pauperis status and directing Plaintiff to file an amended complaint were sent to him at his last known address but were returned as undeliverable. The complaint form contains a paragraph advising plaintiffs it is their responsibility to inform the Court of any change of address and failure to do so could result in the dismissal of the case. After review of the record, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending the lawsuit be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. A copy of this Report was sent to Plaintiff at his last known address, return receipt requested, but no objections have been received; accordingly, he is 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 proposed 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). 1 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 the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 6) 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. Finally, it is ORDERED any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 4th day of January, 2017. ____________________________________ 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?