Corbett v. Chapa

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT February 23, 2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

EDWARD MANUAL CORBETT, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00196 § ARMANDO CHAPA, et al., § § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION On January 22, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock issued his “Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge” (D.E. 35).

Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).

Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 35), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, e The Court DISMISSES Plaintiff's lawsuit with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; e The Court DENIES Plaintiff leave to amend his complaint; and e The Court imposes a “STRIKE” against Plaintiff for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and instructs the Clerk of Court to send notice of this dismissal to the Manager of the Three Strikes List for the Southern District of Texas at Three_Strikes @txs.uscourts.gov.

ORDERED on February 23, 2024.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2/2