King v. LaSalle Corrections et al

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 29 Report and Recommendation. It is ORDERED that Defendant's 22 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED without prejudice. It is further ORDERED the Defendants 14 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED AS MOOT. All other motions which may be pending in this civil action are DENIED. Signed by District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 3/9/2018. (slo, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
EARL KING,
Plaintiff,
v.
LASALLE CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-CV-00109-RWS

ORDER
Plaintiff Earl King, a former inmate of the Bowie County Correctional Center proceeding
pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of
his constitutional rights. The 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.
Plaintiff claimed he received an incorrect insulin injection, resulting in physical harm.
Docket No. 1 at 4. Defendants filed a motion arguing Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative
remedies (Docket No. 22), to which the Plaintiff filed a response (Docket No. 26). After review
of the pleadings and the summary judgment evidence, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report
recommending the motion for summary judgment be granted and the lawsuit dismissed without
prejudice. Docket No. 29. The Magistrate Judge also recommended the Defendants’ earlier
motion to dismiss be denied as moot. Id. at 8. Plaintiff received a copy of the Report on February
5, 2018 (Docket No. 30). Plaintiff did not file objections to the Report and Recommendation;
therefore, this Court reviews the Report and Recommendation for clear error. Rodriguez v. Bowen,

857 F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988). Having reviewed the Report, the Court concludes that it
was not clear error for the Magistrate Judge to determine that Plaintiff’s complaint should be
dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. It is accordingly
ORDERED the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 29) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further

. ORDERED the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 22) is
GRANTED and the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED without prejudice. In light of the
above, it is further
ORDERED the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 14) is DENIED AS MOOT.
Finally, it is
ORDERED any and all other motions which may be pending in this civil action are
DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 9th day of March, 2018.

____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE