Brooks v. Bell et al

Filing 33

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING MOTION TO REVOKE PLAINTIFF'S IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS. It is ordered that the Report of the Magistrate Judge 31 is adopted as the opinion of the Di strict Court. It is ordered that the Defendants' motion to revoke Brooks' in forma pauperis status 25 is denied. It is ordered that the Defendants' motion to stay future deadlines 27 is granted. The Defendants shall have 30 days from the date of entry of this order in which to answer or otherwise plead. It is ordered that the Plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint 30 is denied because the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is an agency of the State of Texas and may not be sued in its own name. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 4/13/18. (mrp, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
CHARLES DAVID BROOKS

§

v.

§

OLIVER BELL, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17cv18

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND DENYING MOTION TO REVOKE PLAINTIFF’S IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS
The Plaintiff Charles Brooks, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42
U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged deprivations 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 have filed a motion to dismiss asking that Brooks’ in forma pauperis status
be revoked as barred by the three-strikes provision of 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). After review of the
motion, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the motion be denied. No
objections were filed to this Report; accordingly, the parties are 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 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

1

(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. 31) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion to revoke Brooks’ in forma pauperis status (docket
no. 25) is DENIED. It is further
ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion to stay future deadlines (docket no. 27) is
GRANTED. The Defendants shall have 30 days from the date of entry of this order in which to
answer or otherwise plead to the Plaintiff’s lawsuit. The deadlines set in the previous scheduling
order (docket no. 19) shall begin to run at that time. Finally, it is
ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint to add the Texas Department
of Criminal Justice as a defendant in the lawsuit is DENIED because the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice is an agency of the State of Texas and may not be sued in its own name.

So Ordered and Signed
Apr 13, 2018

2