Mayfield v. Bryant et al

Filing 8

ORDER ADOPTING 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 4/1/17. (ljw, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION LARRY M. MAYFIELD § VS. § S. BRYANT, ET AL. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:16-CV-38 ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Larry M. Mayfield, a prisoner confined at the Gib Lewis Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court referred this matter to the Honorable Keith F. Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, 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 this civil rights action be dismissed without prejudice as repetitious of cause number 9:16-CV-37. 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. Plaintiff filed a response in which he asserts he intended to file this action and cause number 9:16-CV-37 as one civil action. Accordingly, this action will be dismissed, and plaintiff will be permitted to clarify his claims by filing an amended pleading in 9:16-CV-37. ORDER Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (document no. 5) is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 1st day of April, 2017. 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?