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

§ HAROLD RAVEN, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Case No. 6:21-cv-404-JDK-JDL § GREGG COUNTY SHERIFF’S § DEPARTMENT, et al., § § Defendants. § §

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff Harold Raven, a Texas Department of Criminal Justice inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit pursuant to

. Plaintiff alleges that he received inadequate medical care following a slip and fall at the Gregg County Jail. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for disposition. On March 8, 2022, Judge Love issued a Report recommending that the Court dismiss all of Plaintiff’s claims and all defendants other than Plaintiff’s claim that Defendant Dr. Gary White did not call paramedics and waited a month before ordering MRIs and X-rays despite being aware of the extent of Plaintiff’s injuries. Docket No. 14. Plaintiff received a copy of this Report by March 14, 2022, but no objections have been received. See Docket No. 16. This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and Recommendation.

(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en bane), superseded on other grounds by statute,

(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days). Here, Plaintiff did not object in the prescribed period. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson,

(5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied,

(1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law’). Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 14) as the findings of this Court. It is therefore ORDERED that all pending claims in this case other than Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Dr. Gary White are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 28rd day of August, 2022. ey J Korb JHREMYD. KERN DLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE