Jones v. Director TDCJ-CID
MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 17 Report and Recommendation. Ordered that Petitioner's civil rights lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice as to the refilling of another in forma pauperis lawsuit raising the same claims as presented in this case, bu t without prejudice to the refilling of this lawsuit without seeking in forma pauperis status and upon payment of the full filing fee. Ordered that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby denied. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 4/11/2018. (bjc, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TONY RAY JONES, #1312115
DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15cv661
MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Tony Ray Jones (“Jones”) filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The cause of action was referred for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations
for the disposition of the petition.
After reviewing the pleadings in this case, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report, (Dkt. #17),
recommending that his complaint be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because Jones has filed
at least four previous lawsuits or appeals which have been dismissed, in whole or in part, as
frivolous or for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Magistrate Judge
determined that Jones did not pay the full filing fee and failed to meet the imminent danger
requirement, and thus could not proceed under the in forma pauperis statute. (Dkt. #17). A copy
of this Report was sent to Jones at his address; return receipt requested. The docket shows that
Jones received a copy of the Report on December 29, 2016. (Dkt. #20). However, to date, no
objections to the Report have been filed and no filing fee has been paid.
Accordingly, Jones 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.”). Accordingly it is
ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #17), is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the Court. Moreover, it is
ORDERED that Petitioner’s above-styled civil rights lawsuit is DIMISSED with
prejudice as to the refiling of another in forma pauperis lawsuit raising the same claims as
presented in this case, but without prejudice to the refiling of this lawsuit without seeking in forma
pauperis status and upon payment of the full filing fee. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby
So Ordered and Signed
Apr 11, 2018
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?