Fenton v. Baker et al

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The Report and Recommendation 16 is ADOPTED. The civil rights complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. All motions by either party not previously ruled on are hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 04/06/15. (mll, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION MARK EDWARD FENTON, #859072 § VS. § EDGAR D. BAKER, ET AL. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:14cv995 ORDER OF DISMISSAL Plaintiff Mark Edward Fenton, an inmate confined at the Michael Unit of the Texas prison system, filed the above-styled and numbered civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love, who issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that the complaint should be dismissed. The Plaintiff has filed response (docket entry #19), which is construed as 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 Report and Recommendation (docket entry #16) is ADOPTED. It is further 1 . ORDERED that the civil rights complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. It is finally ORDERED that all motions by either party not previously ruled on are hereby DENIED. It is SO ORDERED. SIGNED this 6th day of April, 2015. ____________________________________ MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER 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?