IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

FREDERICK BRAGGS, § § Plaintiff, § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:19-CV-00077-RWS § v. § § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, § § Defendant. § §

ORDER The Plaintiff Frederick Braggs, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under

complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. This Court referred the case to the United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff originally filed a habeas corpus petition challenging a prison disciplinary proceeding. The petition also raised allegations of excessive force, racial discrimination and ineffective counsel in a pending criminal prosecution. These claims were severed into the present civil rights lawsuit. The Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to pay the statutory fee for a civil rights lawsuit or file an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis accompanied by a certified inmate trust account data sheet, as required by

(b). The Magistrate Judge also directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint setting out a short and plain statement of his claims. Plaintiff did not comply with either of these orders. After reviewing the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the lawsuit be dismissed with prejudice as to Plaintiff’s claims of excessive force and the conduct of defense counsel, and without prejudice as to Plaintiff’s claim of racial discrimination. Plaintiff received a copy of this Report on September 30, 2020. He did not filed any objections. Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report have been filed, neither party is entitled to de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions and recommendations, and except upon grounds of plain error, they are barred from appellate review

of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. 28 U.S.C § 636(b)(1)(C); Douglass v. United Services Automobile Assoc.,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the record in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson,

(5th Cir.), cert. denied,

,

(1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). It is accordingly ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 5) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further

ORDERED that the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to the Plaintiff’s claims of excessive force and the conduct of defense counsel, and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the Plaintiff’s claims of racial discrimination. It is further ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED. SIGNED this 26th day of February, 2021.

Je Dole. LU? febrry ectee □□ ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 3 of 3