Opinion
Case No. 6:19-cv-114-JDK-KNM
03-23-2021
RICHARD SCOTT SHAFER, Plaintiff, v. BRYAN COLLIER, et al., Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Richard Scott Shafer, a prisoner within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for disposition. Before the Court are Defendants Julie Bales and Kevin Thomas's motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 94).
On January 21, 2021, Judge Mitchell issued a Report recommending that the Court grant Defendants' motion to dismiss and that Plaintiff's claims against these Defendants be dismissed with prejudice. Docket No. 132. A copy of this Report was sent to Plaintiff, but no objections have been filed. Docket No. 137.
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 Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).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. 132) as the findings of this Court. The Court hereby GRANTS Defendants Bales and Thomas's motion to dismiss (Docket No. 94) and DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims against these Defendants WITH PREJUDICE. Defendants Bales and Thomas are dismissed as parties to this case.
The dismissal of these claims and parties has no effect on the remaining claims and parties in this lawsuit.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 23rd day of March, 2021.
/s/_________
JEREMY D. KERNODLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE