Reed v. Ogunlade

Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Ootoner 29, 2021 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan □□□□□□□ clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION FREDERICK E REED, § Plaintiff, VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:21-CV-129 OLUFOLAKE OGUNLADE, et al., Defendants. : ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation (““M&R”). (D.E. 18). The M&R recommends that the Court retain Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate indifference against Defendant Ogulande in her individual capacity. The M&R also recommends that the Court dismiss with prejudice (1) Plaintiff's claims for money damages against Defendants Ogunlade and Guana in their official capacities as barred by the Eleventh Amendment, (2) Plaintiffs claim against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (“TDCJ”) as barred by the Eleventh Amendment, and (3) Plaintiff's deliberate indifference claim against Defendant Guana in his individual capacity for failure to state a claim. (D.E. 6).

The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) 1/2 (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015).

Having carefully reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 18). Accordingly: (1) The Court RETAINS Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate indifference against Defendant Ogulande in her individual capacity. (D.E. 6). (2) The Court DISMISSES with prejudice: a. Plaintiff's claims for money damages against Defendants Ogunlade and Guana in their official capacities as barred by the Eleventh Amendment; b. Plaintiffs claim against the TDCJ as barred by the Eleventh Amendment; and c. Plaintiffs deliberate indifference claim against Defendant Guana in his individual capacity for failure to state a claim.

SO ORDERED.

D S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: Corpus Christi, Texas October Boh 2021 2/2