Ziegner v. Schreiber

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The report of the magistrate judge 5 is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. The above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 03/04/15. (mll, )

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

§

v.

§

JAMES SCHREIBER

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:14cv774

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Jonathan Ziegner, 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.
Zeigner was ordered to pay the filing fee of $400.00 or to submit an application for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis which was accompanied by a certified inmate trust account data sheet
from an authorized official of the prison, as required by 28 U.S.C. §1915(b). When he did not
comply with this order, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the lawsuit be
dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Ziegner did
not file objections to this report; 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 record 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.
1

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. 5) is ADOPTED as the

opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). It is further
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
DENIED.
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 4th day of March, 2015.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2