Summary
noting that the Board "is a division of the [Texas Department of Criminal Justice,] a state agency, and as such, is 'cloaked with Eleventh Amendment immunity'" (quoting Littles v. Bd. of Pardons & Paroles Div., 68 F.3d 122, 123 (5th Cir. 1995); citations omitted)
Summary of this case from Toliver v. GutierrezOpinion
Civil No. CC-07-037.
February 18, 2008
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On January 7, 2008, the United States Magistrate Judge filed a memorandum recommending the Court grant Defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismiss Plaintiff's claims with prejudice (D.E. 29). The bases for her recommendation are that (1) Plaintiff's due process claims have no merit; (2) Plaintiff fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted; and (3) Defendants' are entitled to immunity.
Plaintiff did not file objections. The Court regards such omission as Plaintiff's agreement with and acceptance of the Magistrate Judge's findings. Having reviewed the pleadings on file, the Court finds no error in the Magistrate Judge's memorandum. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)). The Court adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED (D.E. 23, 24). Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
ORDERED.