Clark v. City of Henderson, Texas

District Court, E.D. Texas

Clark v. City of Henderson, Texas

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:20-cv-00468 Jesse Daniel Clark, II, Plaintiff, V. City of Henderson, Texas et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff Jesse Daniel Clark, II filed this suit seeking relief pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. Doc. 1. The case was referred to United States District Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b). Doc. 4. On September 8, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to submit an amended complaint within 30 days addressing identified de- ficiencies in the original complaint. Doc. 5. On October 5, 2020, the court granted plaintiff's request for an extension of time to comply, and the deadline was extended for an addi- tional 30 days. Doc. 8. The order was returned to the court as unclaimed by plaintiff. Plaintiff did not file an amended com- plaint. The magistrate judge issued a report recommending dis- missal of the complaint without prejudice for failure to pros- ecute. Doc. 10. Plaintiff received the report and recommenda- tion by certified mail on December 5, 2020. Doc. 11. Plaintiff did not object to the report and recommendation. When a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s report, the court reviews the record only for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

79 F.3d 1415, 1420

(5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its

findings and recommendation. This action is dismissed with- out prejudice. So ordered by the court on December 30, 2020. fabs BARKER United States District Judge

-2-

Reference

Status
Unknown