Chavez, Jr. v. Law Librarian Spurlock
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING 3 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 2/14/13. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
NAZARIO CHAVEZ JR.
LAW LIBRARIAN SPURLOCK
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:12cv204
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Nazario Chavez Jr., proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42
U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights in the Texas Department
of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division. 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
The lawsuit was severed from civil action no. 9:11cv121, and Chavez was ordered to file an
amended complaint and to pay the statutory filing fee or submit an application for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis, together with a certified inmate trust account data sheet. When Chavez did not
comply with any of these orders, the Magistrate Judge issues 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 Chavez 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. 3) is hereby ADOPTED as
the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled civil action be and hereby 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 on February _____, 2013.
United States District Judge
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?