Saavedra v. Rupert et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 4 Report and Recommendations AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT. This case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Any pending motions are denied. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 3/28/16. (mjc, )

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

§

v.

§

JOHN RUPERT, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15cv358

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
This lawsuit was part of a larger complaint which was severed into cases for each listed
plaintiff. Upon severance, the individual plaintiffs were directed to file amended complaints and pay
the filing fee or seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis. When the Plaintiff in this case did not do
so, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the lawsuit be dismissed. The Plaintiff
received a copy of this report 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. 4) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further

1

.

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
DENIED.
SIGNED this 28th day of March, 2016.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2