Blaney v. UTMB, No. 9:2021cv00023 - Document 6 (E.D. Tex. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION and Order overruling objections and accepting 3 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 5/1/21. (tkd, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Blaney v. UTMB Doc. 6 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION** IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION JERRY BLANEY § VS. § UTMB § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:21-CV-23 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff, Jerry Blaney, an inmate formerly confined at the Eastham Unit with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendant UTMB. The court referred this matter to the Honorable Keith Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing this complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (docket entry no. 3). The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the records, and pleadings. Plaintiff filed Objections on March 18, 2021 (docket entry no. 5). This requires a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). In his Objections, plaintiff does not address the applicable sanctions imposed by the Northern District of Texas. The Northern District of Texas barred plaintiff from filing any new civil action and imposed a sanction for his abuse of judicial resources. See Blaney v. Ovard, Civil action No. 3:15cv4035 (N.D. Tex. 2015). The court ordered plaintiff to pay sanctions in the amount of $100.00 and barred him from filing any new civil action in that court without first paying the required filing fee or obtaining prior authorization from a district judge or magistrate judge. Plaintiff has neither alleged nor demonstrated he has satisfied the monetary sanction imposed by the Northern District. Dockets.Justia.com As this court recognizes sanctions imposed by our sister courts, plaintiff is barred from prosecuting a civil rights action pursuant to these sanctions imposed by the Northern District. To the extent plaintiff attempts to argue he is under imminent danger to potentially overcome the 1915(g) bar or the Northern District sanctions, plaintiff has failed to allege or demonstrate he is under imminent danger. Plaintiff complains he suffers from an infection that he alleges has been untreated for over twelve years. Plaintiff, however, concedes he has been given antibiotics but believes they have not been effective. These allegations are insufficient to invoke the imminent danger exception. ORDER Accordingly, plaintiff’s Objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the Magistrate Judge is ACCEPTED. A Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. So ORDERED and SIGNED, May 01, 2021. ____________________ Ron Clark Senior Judge 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.
