Jones v. The Texas U.S. District Courts Judges et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Plaintiff has thirty (30) days from entry below to pay the full $400.00 filing fee. Failure to comply will result in dismissal of this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 1/11/18. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
ELVIS WAYNE JONES
THE TEXAS U.S. DISTRICT COURTS
JUDGES, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:17-CV-183
MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND
ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, Elvis Wayne Jones, an inmate confined at the Polunsky Unit with the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants The Texas U.S. District Courts Judges,
the Texas Board Pardons and Paroles, and the Texas Allan b. Polunsky Monitored Facility.
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 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
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. Plaintiff filed
objections (docket entry nos. 6 & 8) to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge. This requires a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and applicable
law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
Plaintiff’s objections are, for the most part, incomprehensible. Plaintiff appears to allege a
conspiracy between United States Magistrate Judge Keith Giblin and former United States
Magistrate Judge Earl Hines. Although not explicitly stated, it would appear plaintiff alleges they
have conspired to prevent him from proceeding in forma pauperis. Plaintiff also accuses various
courts of “espionage.” As outlined in the Report and Recommendation, however, plaintiff has
incurred three strikes against him in the Eastern District of Texas, the Southern District of Texas,
and the District of Alaska. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate he is under imminent danger of serious
physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Accordingly, plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED.
Plaintiff has thirty (30) days from entry below to pay the full $400.00 filing fee. Failure to comply
will result in dismissal of this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
So Ordered and Signed
Jan 11, 2018
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?