DeRouen v. Aransas County Detention Center

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT May 03, 2023 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

LAYNE ALAN DEROUEN, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:22-CV-00292 § ARANSAS COUNTY DETENTION § CENTER, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE On March 20, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock issued a “Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge” (M&R, D.E. 19). Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. 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 M&R 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 M&R. 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 M&R (D.E. 19), 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 1 / 2 Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Plaintiff's § 1983 claim against Officer Cox in his individual capacity is RETAINED, and Plaintiffs § 1983 claims relating to all other defendants are DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. ORDERED on May 3, 2023. [eke GONZAIGS RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2