Escolona v. TDCJ

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

JULIO ESCOLONA § § Plaintiff, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-CV-290 § RYAN COLLIER, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie Hampton’s Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R). (D.E. 18). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015). Having carefully reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety (D.E. 18). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: (1) Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against Defendants Ryan Collier and C.F. Hazlewood in their individual and official capacities are retained. (2) Defendants J. Gaona and V.A. Crittenden are DISMISSED from this action. The Clerk of Court is ORDERED to TERMINATE Defendant J. Gaona and Defendant V.A. Crittenden from the docket sheet. (3) Plaintiff's First Amendment claims against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice are DISMISSED with prejudice as barred by the Eleventh Amendment.

SO ORDERED.

DLN NF XX NA Nu □□ S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: Corpus Christi, Texas March 2, 2021

2/2