Opinion
6:23-cv-402-JDK-JDL
12-01-2023
ESAW LAMPKIN, Plaintiff, v. CHAPLAIN JERRY CORDER, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
JEREMY D. KERNODLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Esaw Lampkin, a former Henderson County Jail inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for disposition.
On September 7, 2023, Judge Love issued a Report recommending that the Court dismiss this case with prejudice for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), but without prejudice as to the refiling of his lawsuit without seeking in forma pauperis status and payment of the full filing fee. Docket No. 6. A copy of the Report was mailed to Plaintiff at his last-known address, but was returned as undeliverable. Docket No. 7. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Report or updated his address.
This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).
Here, Plaintiff did not object in the prescribed period. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate Judge's findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge's Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”).
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 6) as the findings of this Court and DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims with prejudice for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) but without prejudice as to the refiling of his lawsuit without seeking in forma pauperis status and payment of the full filing fee. Plaintiff may also resume this lawsuit by paying the entire filing fee of $402 within thirty days after entry of this order.
So Ordered and Signed.