Barton v. State Of Texas et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 7 Report and Recommendation. Ordered that the Plaintiff Ronnie Barton's in forma pauperis status is hereby revoked. Ordered that should the Plaintiff pay the full filing fee within 15 days after the date of entry of final judgment in this case, he shall be allowed to proceed in the lawsuit as though the full fee had been paid from the outset.. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 8/13/2013. (bjc)
Barton v. State Of Texas et al
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
RONNIE BARTON #1792342
STATE OF TEXAS, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:13cv118
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Ronnie Barton, 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
Barton complained of an incident which occurred on January 18, 2013, in which he was
allegedly spat upon by a guard and then given a false disciplinary case. After review of the pleading,
the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that Barton’s in forma pauperis status be
revoked and that the lawsuit be dismissed. The Magistrate Judge observed that Barton had filed at
least three previous lawsuits or appeals which had been dismissed as frivolous or for failure to state
a claim, and so was subject to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). That statute provides that
inmates who have filed at least three previous lawsuits or appeals which have been dismissed under
28 U.S.C. §1915(g) cannot proceed under the in forma pauperis statute unless they show that they
are in imminent danger of serious physical injury.
In the present case, the Magistrate Judge concluded that Barton failed to show that he was
in imminent danger of serious physical injury as of the time that the lawsuit was filed. Because
allegations of past harm do not show “imminent danger,” the Magistrate Judge concluded that Barton
failed to trigger the “imminent danger” exception to §1915(g), and recommended that the lawsuit
be dismissed on this basis.
Barton received a copy of the Magistrate Judge’s Report on July 8, 2013, but filed no
objections thereto; 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 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 carefully reviewed the pleadings and documents in this case, as well as the
Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has concluded that the Report of the
Magistrate Judge is correct. It is accordingly
ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 7) is hereby ADOPTED as
the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the Plaintiff Ronnie Barton’s in forma pauperis status is hereby REVOKED.
It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled civil action be and hereby is DISMISSED with prejudice
as to the refiling of another in forma pauperis lawsuit raising the same claims as herein presented,
but without prejudice to the refiling of this lawsuit without seeking in forma pauperis status and
upon payment of the statutory filing fee. It is further
ORDERED that should the Plaintiff pay the full filing fee within 15 days after the date of
entry of final judgment in this case, he shall be allowed to proceed in the lawsuit as through the full
fee had been paid from the outset. Because Barton is ineligible to proceed in forma pauperis, the
full filing fee is $400.00. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 13 day of August, 2013.
Ron Clark, 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?