Muckleroy v. White
Muckleroy v. White
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:19-cv-00363 Rodney Dewayne Muckleroy, Plaintiff, V. FNU Dr. White, et al., Defendants.
ORDER Plaintiff Rodney Dewayne Muckleroy, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this lawsuit pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants were deliberately in- different to his serious medical needs. Doc. 1. This case was referred to Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell. Doc. 2. On January 31, 2020, defendants filed a motion for sum- mary judgment, arguing that plaintiff had failed to exhaust administrative remedies before filing this lawsuit. Doc. 32. Plaintiff did not respond to the motion. Judge Mitchell en- tered a report and recommendation that defendants’ sum- mary judgment motion be granted. Doc. 41. The report was mailed to plaintiff (Doc. 43), who received it and did not file any objections. When there are no timely objections to a report and rec- ommendation, the district court only reviews the record for clear error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,
79 F.3d 1415, 1420(5th Cir. 1996). Here, because there is no clear error, the court adopts the report and recommendation and grants de- fendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 32). For the reasons stated in Judge Mitchell’s report and recommenda- tion, plaintiff's claims against defendants are dismissed with- out prejudice.
So ordered by the court on August 31, 2020.
JCAMPBELL BARKER United States District Judge
_2-
Reference
- Status
- Unknown