Dotson v. Warden Michael Unit et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The Report of the Magistrate Judge 13 is hereby ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. This civil action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon whi ch relief may be granted. The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to the Administrator of the Three Strikes List for the Eastern District of Texas. Any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 04/23/14. (mll, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BRUCE DARNELL DOTSON II, #1432390
WARDEN, MICHAEL UNIT, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:13cv888
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Bruce Dotson, 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
Dotson complained that he was denied due process in a prison disciplinary proceeding. After
review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the lawsuit be
dismissed with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted. The Magistrate Judge determined that Dotson failed to show the deprivation of a
constitutionally protected liberty or property interest, as set forth in Sandin v. Conner, 115 S.Ct.
2293, 2301 (1995). The Magistrate Judge also rejected Dotson’s contention that the failure of state
prison officials to follow their own rules is itself a constitutional due process violation, citing Myers
v. Klevenhagen, 97 F.3d 91, 94 (5th Cir. 1996).
Dotson received a copy of the Magistrate Judge’s Report on March 25, 2014, but filed no
objections thereto; 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).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge.
Upon such review, the Court has determined that 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. 13) is hereby ADOPTED
as the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled civil action be and hereby is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28
U.S.C. §1915A. It is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall send a copy of this order to the Administrator of the Three
Strikes List for the Eastern District of Texas. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 23rd day of April, 2014.
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?