Welch v. Texas Tech University Health Services Center et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's 9 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation. Welch's civil rights complaint and all claims alleged therein should be dismissed with prejudice as frivolous. Welch's objections should be overrule d. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. The dismissal of Welch's complaint shall count as a qualifying dismissal under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g) and Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 1996). Any pending motions are denied. (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 2/29/2012) (cb)

IN THE LINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUBBOCK DIVISION
DONNY WELCH,
Institutional ID No. 1375713.
SID No. 7441051.

CNIL ACTION NO.

Plaintiff,

5:10-CV-00026-C
V.

TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY
HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER. e/ a/..
ECF

Defendants.

ORDER
Plaintiff Donny Welch, fied

a

pro

se

civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. $ 1983

against Defendants Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lanette Linthicum, Dr. Denise
Shields, Michael Anderson, Harry Edwards, Bonnie Delgarza, Venita Hamilton, George Allen, Ms.

NFN Woodall, Ms. NFN Conner, Dr. NFNMcDonald, Dr.NFNManning, Mr.NFNHanalson, John
Wells, Billy Taylor, Andy Derler, Dr. Dana Bulter, and Dr. NFN Azatian. Welch is suing the named
Defendants in both their individual and official capacities for alleged deliberate indifference to his
serious medical needs when he was incarcerated in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice John

Montford Unit in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He requests
declaratory, injunctive, and monetary

relief. Welch was granted permission to proceed in forma

pauperis by Order dated February 19,2010.
The complaint was transferred to the docket ofthe United States Magistrate Judge, who held
a

televideo hearing pursuant to Spears v. McCotter,766

F

.2d 179,181-82 (5th Cir. 1985), on April

22,2010. Welch appeared and testified under oath. He did not consent to proceed before the United
States Magistrate Judge.
Pursuant to this Court's Order entered on February 19,2010, the Magistrate Judge entered

findings of fact, conclusions of law, and

a

recommendation for disposition on July 27,2010. Welch

filed objections on August 13,2010.
The undersigned United States District Judge has made an independent examination of the

record in this case and has examined the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge and considered Welch's objections. Based upon this Court's independent
examination of the record ofthe evidentiary hearing, Welch's complaint, Welch's sworn testimony,
and authenticated prison records, the Court finds the following:

l.

Welch's objections should be ovemrled.

2.

The Magistrate Judge's findings, conclusions, and recommendation should be
accepted and adopted, and Welch's civil rights complaint and all claims alleged therein should be
dismissed with prejudice as frivolous.
SO ORDERED.
Judgment shall be entered accordingly.
The dismissal of Welch's complaint shall count as a qualiffing dismissal under 28

U.S.C. $ 1915(e) and Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 1996).

Any pending motions are denied.

---:U-,

Dated P earuary

20 12.

CU