Odom v. Gregg County Sheriff's Department

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:23-cv-00032 James Ralph Odom, Plaintiff, V. Gregg County Sheriff’s Department et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff James Ralph Odom, proceeding pro se and 7 forma pau- peris, filed the above-styled and numbered civil rights lawsuit pursu- ant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was referred to United States Mag- istrate Judge John D. Love. On December 8, 2023, Judge Love is- sued a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Doc. 23. Judge Love recommended that the claims against the Gregg County Sheriff’s Department and defendant Grizzle in his official capacity be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. Jd.

Judge Love recommended that the claims against defendant Ramo be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim, and that the claims against the Doe defendants be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. /d. Judge Love recommended that the ex- cessive force and RLUIPA claims against defendant Hoover be dis- missed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Jd. Lastly, Judge Love recommended that the First Amendment claim against defend- ant Hoover and the excessive force and medical deliberate indiffer- ence claims against defendant Owens should proceed past the initial screening stage. /d. To date, no objections have been filed and the time period for doing so has passed.

When no party objects to the magistrate judge’s report and rec- ommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass vy. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (Sth Cir. 1996). Hav- ing reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommen- dation. Doc. 23.

For the reasons stated in the report, the claims against the Gregg County Sheriff’s Department and defendant Grizzle are dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The claims against defend- ant Ramo are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim.

The claims against the Doe defendants are dismissed without preju- dice for failure to state a claim. The excessive force and RLUIPA claims against defendant Hoover are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff’s First Amendment claim against defendant Hoover and excessive force and medical deliberate indif- ference claims against defendant Owens remain before the court on referral to the magistrate judge. The clerk shall terminate all other defendants from the docket.

So ordered by the court on March 6, 2024.

Conlok, _fabok BARKER United States District Judge