Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-CV-00049-MJT
04-01-2020
RONALD SATISH EMRIT, Plaintiff, v. BETSY DEVOS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, DEFAULT RESOLUTION GROUP, NELNET, ACTION FINANCIAL SERVICES, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This case is referred to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge, for all pretrial matters. The court has received and considered the report of the magistrate judge (Doc. No. 3), which recommends dismissing pro se Plaintiff Ronald Satish Emrit's ("Emrit") complaint as frivolous. On March 23, 2020, Emrit filed a "Notice of Appeal," which the court construes as timely objections to the report and recommendation. (Doc. No. 5.)
A party who files timely, written objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation is entitled to a de novo determination of those findings or recommendations to which the party specifically objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2)-(3). "Parties filing objections must specifically identify those findings [to which they object]. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court." Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
In his objections, Emrit claims that the "lower court's" classification of plaintiff as a "vexatious filer" is incorrect. (Doc. No. 5, p. 1.) Emrit discusses the merits of his numerous lawsuits filed nationwide in an apparent attempt to refute the magistrate judge's classification of Emrit as a serial pro se filer. The only reference to this lawsuit is a discussion regarding Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos and the U.S. Department of Education, but these objections are largely a restatement of Emrit's original complaint. (Doc. No. 5, p. 3.) After considering Emrit's objections, the court finds they are without merit and that Judge Hawthorn's findings and conclusions are correct.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that the magistrate judge's "Report and Recommendation" (Doc. No. 3) is ADOPTED, that Emrit's complaint is DISMISSED as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
Further, although this is the first time Emrit has filed suit in the Eastern District of Texas, given his filing history throughout the country and the frivolousness of his present complaint, Emrit is warned that he could be subject to sanctions, including filing restrictions, should he continue to file frivolous suits in this District.
A Final Judgment will be entered separately.
SIGNED this 1st day of April, 2020.
/s/_________
Michael J. Truncale
United States District Judge