Parrott v. Davis

Full title: JIMMIE MARK PARROTT, JR. v. EMMA DAVIS

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Lufkin Division

Date published: Mar 2, 2023

Civil Action 1:21-CV-411 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 2, 2023)

Opinion

Civil Action 1:21-CV-411

03-02-2023

JIMMIE MARK PARROTT, JR. v. EMMA DAVIS

CHRISTINE L. STETSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CHRISTINE L. STETSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Jimmie Mark Parrott, Jr., an inmate confined at the Stiles Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The above-styled action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.

Discussion

Plaintiff has filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (doc. #34) in which he requests dismissal of the above-styled action without prejudice. Plaintiff is entitled to dismiss the case prior to the service of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). In this case, the opposing party has filed neither an answer nor a motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the action should be dismissed without prejudice.

Recommendation

The above-styled action should be dismissed without prejudice.

Objections

Within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations contained within this report within fourteen days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from the entitlement of de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.