Casares v. Linthicum et al

Filing 120

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 107 Report and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. ORDERED that Defendant Williams motion for partial dismissal (Dkt. #65) is GRANTED. Signed by District Judge Richard A. Schell on 3/19/2020. (gsg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
VINCENT CASARES, #1850085

§

VS.

§

DR. LINTHICUM, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17cv701

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Vincent Casares, an inmate currently confined at the Wayne Scott Unit within the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in the above
styled and numbered civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was referred to United States Magistrate
Judge, the Honorable K. Nicole Mitchell, for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and
recommendations for the disposition of the case.
On February 4, 2020, Judge Mitchell issued a Report (Dkt. #107), recommending that
Defendant Williams’ motion for partial dismissal (Dkt. #65) be granted for any claims against
her for monetary damages and declaratory relief in her official capacity. Judge Mitchell also
recommended that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Williams for retaliation, conspiracy, and
an alleged due process violation should be dismissed with prejudice. Further, Judge Mitchell
recommended that Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief be denied. Plaintiff’s claims of excessive
force and medical deliberate indifference, however, should proceed.
A copy of this Report was sent to Plaintiff at his address with an acknowledgment card.
The docket reflects that Plaintiff received a copy of the Report before it was returned to the court
on February 11, 2020 (Dkt. #109). To date, however, no objections to the Report have been
filed.
1

Because objections to Judge Mitchell’s Report have not been filed, Plaintiff 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 Auto. Ass’n, 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) (holding that 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 United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #107) is
ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. Further, it is
ORDERED that Defendant Williams’ motion for partial dismissal (Dkt. #65) is
GRANTED for any claims against Defendant Williams for monetary damages and declaratory
relief brought against her in her official capacity—as well as Plaintiff’s claims against
her concerning retaliation, conspiracy, and due process.

Those claims are DISMISSED

with prejudice. Plaintiff’s claims of excessive force and medical deliberate indifference shall
remain before the court. Moreover, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief is DENIED.

.

SIGNED this the 19th day of March, 2020.

2

_______________________________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE