Dodd v. Nacogdoches County Sheriff Department et al
Filing
8
ORDER ADOPTING 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 12/29/16. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUFKIN DIVISION
ROGER L. DODD
§
VS.
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:16-CV-181
NACOGDOCHES COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., §
ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, Roger L. Dodd, an inmate confined at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department
of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights
complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several defendants.
The court referred this matter to the Honorable Keith Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge,
at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The
Magistrate Judge recommends plaintiff’s civil rights action be dismissed for want of prosecution
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
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 pleadings. No objections
to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge have been filed to date. 1
1
Plaintiff filed correspondence with the Court which was filed as objections in error. A review of the
correspondence reveals plaintiff requested his case be dismissed without prejudice as it was filed in error (docket entry
no. 7).
ORDER
Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are
correct, and the report of the Magistrate Judge is PARTIALLY ADOPTED to the extent it
recommends dismissal. A Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with the Magistrate
Judge’s recommendations.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 29 day of December, 2016.
___________________________________
Ron Clark, 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?