Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:12cv334
05-21-2013
JIMMIE CUDJO v. GUILLERMO DELAROSA, ET AL.
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Jimmie Cudjo, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights during his confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division. This Court ordered that the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges. The remaining Defendants in the case are Warden Jay Rupert and Major Guillermo Delarosa.
Cudjo complained that the Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his safety after he allegedly received a threatening note and later was assaulted. The Defendants were ordered to answer the lawsuit and filed a motion for summary judgment, to which Cudjo filed a response. Both parties also furnished summary judgment evidence in support of their respective positions.
After review of the pleadings and the evidence, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted and that the lawsuit be dismissed with prejudice. Cudjo received a copy of the Report on April 16, 2013, but filed no objections thereto; accordingly, he is barred from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th 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. 41) is hereby ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the Defendants' motion for summary judgment (docket no. 33) is hereby GRANTED and the above-styled civil action is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED.
___________
LEONARD DAVIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE