IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION WILLIE BELL, § § Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-3415-L § DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF’S, § DEPARTMENT; LUPE VALDEZ; § YOLANDA LARA; and OFFICER § RICHARDSON, § § Defendants. § ORDER The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) (Doc. 11) was entered on August 19, 2019, recommending that the court dismiss with prejudice this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) for failure to state a claim. The Report further recommends that the dismissal of this action should count as a “strike” or “prior occasion” within the meaning

(g). No objections to the Report were filed. Having reviewed the pleadings, file, record in this case, and Report, the court determines that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of the court. Accordingly, the court dismisses with prejudice this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) for failure to state a claim. Further, the dismissal of this action shall count as a “strike” or “prior occasion” within the meaning

(g). The court prospectively certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. See

(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). In support of this certification, the court accepts and incorporates by reference the Report. See Baugh v. Taylor,

, 202 and Order – Page 1 n.21 (Sth Cir. 1997). Based on the Report, the court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. See Howard v. King,

(Sth Cir. 1983). In the event of an appeal, Plaintiff may challenge this certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh,

; Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). It is so ordered this 13th day of September, 2019.

— Sam A. Lindsay United States District Judge

Order — Page 2