Solomon v. Williams et al

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The civil rights complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. All motions not previously ruled on are DENIED. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 01/26/15. (mll, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION

WOODY SOLOMON, #618624

§

VS.

§

ADRIENNE WILLIAMS, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:14cv589

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff Woody Solomon, an inmate confined at the Coffield Unit of the Texas prison
system, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed the above-styled and numbered civil rights
lawsuit. The complaint was directly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love, who
issued a Second Report and Recommendation concluding that the civil rights lawsuit should be
dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). The Plaintiff has filed objections.
The Report of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and
recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration, and having
made a de novo review of the objections raised by the Plaintiff, the Court is of the opinion that the
findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the objections by the Plaintiff are
without merit. Therefore the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate
Judge as the findings and conclusions of the Court. It is accordingly
ORDERED that the civil rights complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). It is further
ORDERED that all motions not previously ruled on are DENIED.

The Court finally observes that this lawsuit makes the third time the Plaintiff has had a civil
rights lawsuit dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). See Solomon v. Doyle, Civil Action
No. 6:14cv105 (E.D. Tex. July 18, 2014) (no appeal); Solomon v. Anderson, Civil Action No. 4:14CV-179-A (N.D. Tex. March 18, 2014), appeal dismissed, No. 14-10565 (5th Cir. July 22, 2014).
Because he has accumulated “three strikes,” he may not proceed IFP either in any civil action or in
any appeal of a civil action which is filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility, unless
he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 26th day of January, 2015.

__________________________________
LEONARD DAVIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2