Harper v. Taylor

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

TEXARKANA DIVISION DERRICK D. HARPER, §

§

§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:19-CV-00157-RWS

Plaintiff,

§ § v.

§ §

SHARON TAYLOR,

§ §

Defendant. §

ORDER Plaintiff Derrick Harper, an inmate proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled and numbered civil action complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. The case was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff sued a private individual who accused him of criminal misconduct. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending the lawsuit be dismissed because Plaintiff made no showing Defendant was a state actor for purposes of § 1983 liability. Docket No. 8.

A copy of this Report was sent to Plaintiff at his last known address, return receipt requested, and was received on December 1, 2020 (Docket No. 9). No objections have been received.

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., 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the pleadings 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, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243 (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. 8) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further

ORDERED that the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. It is further

ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED.

SIGNED this 1st day of March, 2021.

[ocher t+ LO Blrripects G2, ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE