Filed: Mar. 07, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 07, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER , District Judge . The Plaintiff Shannon Richardson, proceeding pro se , filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaining of alleged violations of her constitutional rights. This Court ordered that the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Lo
Summary: MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER , District Judge . The Plaintiff Shannon Richardson, proceeding pro se , filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaining of alleged violations of her constitutional rights. This Court ordered that the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Loc..
More
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, District Judge.
The Plaintiff Shannon Richardson, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaining of alleged violations of her constitutional rights. This Court ordered that the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges.
The magistrate judge analyzed the pleadings and documents in the case and issued a report recommending that the lawsuit be dismissed with prejudice. Richardson received a copy of this report on January 14, 2016, but filed no objections thereto; accordingly, she is barred from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The Court has reviewed the record in this cause and the report of the magistrate judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the report of the magistrate judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243 (1989) (where no objections to a magistrate judge's report are filed, the standard of review is "clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.") It is accordingly
ORDERED that the report of the magistrate judge (docket no. 55) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by the Defendant Tim Bryan (docket no. 36) and the motion to dismiss filed by the Defendants Andrew Leach and Darrell Williams (docket no. 48) are GRANTED and the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is further
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED.
