Elliso v. Rupert et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The report of the magistrate judge 4 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 11/12/15. (mll, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JOHN RUPERT, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15cv302
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff R.A. Elliso, 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
This lawsuit was severed out of a larger one. Elliso was directed to file an amended
complaint and to pay the filing fee or seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis, but he did not comply.
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.
A copy of this report was sent to Elliso at his last known address, return receipt requested,
but no objections have been received; 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. 4) 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. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
SIGNED this 12th day of November, 2015.
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?