Mills v. Langley et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting the magistrate judge's 7 Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's 6 Motion to dismiss the action is granted. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 5/4/2016. (bjc, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION GREGORY JAMES MILLS § VS. § RICHARD LANGLEY, ET AL. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:15-CV-165 MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Gregory James Mills, a prisoner confined at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Richard Langley, Mark Duff, Stephanie Seek, Taliesin Stern, Diana Jones, and Natashia Cooper. The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge recommending that the action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record and the pleadings. No objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge were filed by the parties. Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge (document no. 7) is ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the action (document no. 6) is GRANTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge’s recommendation. SIGNED this 4th day of May, 2016. ____________________________________ MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?