From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vela v. Pinney

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
May 9, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-00004 (S.D. Tex. May. 9, 2013)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-00004

05-09-2013

ASENCION VELA, Plaintiff, v. CRAIG A. PINNEY, et al, Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND TO RETAIN CASE

On April 3, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington issued her "Memorandum and Recommendation to Dismiss Certain Claims and to Retain Case" (D.E. 16). The Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).

Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation (D.E. 16), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS

1. The Plaintiff's claims for monetary damages against Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED as barred by the Eleventh Amendment;
2. The Plaintiff's excessive force claims against Officer Pinney and Sergeant Trevino in their individual capacities are RETAINED and the Court ORDERS service on these Defendants; and
3. The Plaintiff's claims for failure to protect and failure to follow procedures against the remaining Defendants are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and/or as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A(b)(1).

_________________

NELVA GONZALES RAMOS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Vela v. Pinney

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
May 9, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-00004 (S.D. Tex. May. 9, 2013)
Case details for

Vela v. Pinney

Case Details

Full title:ASENCION VELA, Plaintiff, v. CRAIG A. PINNEY, et al, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

Date published: May 9, 2013

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-00004 (S.D. Tex. May. 9, 2013)