Robinson v. Hillhouse et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 49 Report and Recommendation. Ordered that the above-styled 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 8/15/2017. (bjc, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERIFF BOTIE HILLHOUSE, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv1396
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Windell Robinson, 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.
The Defendants Dr. Mongari and Nurse Blake have filed a motion to dismiss stating that they
sent copies of their answer and their disclosures to Robinson at his last known address, the
Henderson County Jail, but these were returned as undeliverable. The on-line records of the jail
show that Robinson was released from the jail on May 22, 2017, and is no longer confined there.
On July 18, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the lawsuit be
dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The
Magistrate Judge observed that the original complaint form filed by Robinson contained a notice
stating that it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to advise the Court of any change of address and the
failure to file a notice of change of address could result in the dismissal of the lawsuit.
A copy of this Report was sent to Robinson at his last known address, return receipt
requested, but no objections have been received; accordingly, Robinson 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. 49) 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
Aug 15, 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?