Ramos v. Farrell et al, No. 6:2015cv00820 - Document 14 (E.D. Tex. 2018)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION adopting 12 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 6/16/2018. (bjc)

Download PDF
Ramos v. Farrell et al Doc. 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION RAMON RAMOS, #1384334 § VS. § TDCJ MICHAEL UNIT, et al. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15cv820 MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT Plaintiff Ramon Ramos, an inmate of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. The lawsuit was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) as well as the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges. After a review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report, (Dkt. #12), recommending that Plaintiff’s civil rights complaint be dismissed, without prejudice, for Plaintiff’s failure to obey an order of the Court. A copy of this Report was sent to Plaintiff at his address; return receipt requested. The docket shows that Plaintiff received a copy of the Report before July 20, 2017. (Dkt. #13). However, to date, no objections to the Report have been filed. Accordingly, Plaintiff is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). 1 Dockets.Justia.com The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243 (1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). Accordingly it is ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #12), is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. Further, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s civil rights lawsuit is DISMISSED without prejudice. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED. So Ordered and Signed Jun 16, 2018 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.