IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION FREDERICK O’NEAL SCOTT § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-CV-420 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL § JUSTICE, et al., MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff, Frederick O’Neal Scott, an inmate confined at the Mark Stiles Unit with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to

against defendants the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (Stiles Unit) and the University of Texas Medical Branch (Stiles Unit). 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 plaintiff’s civil rights action be dismissed pursuant to

(e)(2)(B) as frivolous. The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record, and pleading. Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. This requires a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration, the court finds plaintiff’s objections lacking in merit. The Magistrate Judge outlined that the complaint recites fantastic charges that are incomprehensible. A review of the Objections filed also reveals that they similarly recite fantastic charges that are not comprehensible. Plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim pursuant to

(e)(2)(b). Denton v. Hernandez,

(1992) (a claim may be deemed to lack an arguable basis in fact only if it is based upon factual allegations that are clearly fanciful or delusional in nature). 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 ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in accordance with the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

2