Thieleman v. White et al

Filing 56

MEMORANDUM OPINION adopting 45 Report and Recommendation. Order denying 39 Motion for placement in protective custody. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 3/6/2018. (bjc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
ROGER M. THIELEMAN, #1153979

§

v.

§

JONI WHITE, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv1300

MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Roger Merritt Thieleman, proceeding pro se, an inmate of the Texas Department
of Criminal Justice brings this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint was
referred for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the
lawsuit. Plaintiff filed a motion for placement in protective custody, (Dkt. #39), which is the
subject of this opinion.
After a review of his motion, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that
Thieleman’s motion for placement in protective custody be denied. (Dkt. #45). A copy of this
Report was sent to Thieleman at his address, return receipt indicating that he received the Report
in November 2017, but no objections have been received to date. Accordingly, Thieleman 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 motion for placement in protective custody 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.),
1

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. # 45), is ADOPTED. Further,
it is
ORDERED that Thieleman’s motion for placement in protective custody, (Dkt. #39), is
DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 6 day of March, 2018.

___________________________________
Ron Clark, United States District Judge

2