Opinion
Civil Action 4:21-cv-03961
03-29-2022
ANDRE OMAR WARREN, Plaintiff, v. JUSTICE PARK DRIVE HOUSTON, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Hon. Charles Eskridge, United States District Judge
Plaintiff Andre Omar Warren filed this action in December 2021 alleging violation of certain of his constitutional rights by Defendants Justice Park Drive Houston. See generally Dkt 1. This matter was referred for disposition to Magistrate Judge Sam S. Sheldon. Dkt 5.
Warren proceeds here pro se. He seeks leave in a one-sentence motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt 6. Judge Sheldon liberally construed the motion and recommended that it be denied. Dkt 12 at 1, citing Derise v United States District Court Middle District of Louisiana, 2021 WL 5071072, *1 (MD La), report and recommendation adopted, 2021 WL 5067442 (MD La).
The district court conducts a de novo review of those conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected. See 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see also United States v Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir 1989, per curiam). To accept any other portions to which there is no objection, the reviewing court need only satisfy itself that no clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v PPG Industries Inc, 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir 1996); see also FRCP 72(b) Advisory Comm Note (1983).
Warren filed no objections. The pleadings, record, applicable law, and recommendations have been reviewed. No. clear error or abuse of discretion appears on the face of the record, and the findings are not contrary to applicable law.
The Memorandum and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted as the Memorandum and Order of this Court.
The motion by Plaintiff Andre Omar Warren proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Dkt 6.
So ordered.