Edwards v. Livingston et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 37 Report and Recommendation. Ordered that the civil action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Ordered that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby denied. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 2/22/2017. (bjc, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BRAD LIVINGSTON, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv242
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Artavias Edwards, 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.
On September 1, 2016, Edwards was ordered to file an amended complaint alleging specific
facts that both allow the court to draw the reasonable inference that the individual defendants are
liable for the harm alleged and that defeat a qualified immunity defense with equal specificity.
Edwards has not complied with this order although he was granted an extension of time to December
15, 2016. He filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint on November 21, 2016, but this
motion asked to be allowed to add additional claims and made no mention of the claims which
Edwards had been ordered to clarify. He did not attach a proposed amended or supplemental
complaint to this motion.
On January 10, 2017, 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 Edwards 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. 37) 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
So Ordered and Signed
Feb 22, 2017
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?