Thomas v. Kwarteng

• Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
• Decided: January 5, 2023
• Docket: 2:22-cv-00163
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT January 05, 2023 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION JEWELL THOMAS, § § Plaintiff, § V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:22-CV-00163 ISAAC KWARTENG, er al., Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie Hampton’s Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R”). (D.E. 10). The M&R recommends that the Court: (1) retain Plaintiff's Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Rehabilitation Act (“RA”) claims against Defendants Dr. Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez. Dr. Lanette Linthicum, and Bobby Lumpkin in their official capacities; (2) dismiss without prejudice Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for money damages against Defendants Dr. Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez, Dr. Lanette Linthicum, Christi McGlothin, and Bobby Lumpkin in their official capacities as barred by the Eleventh Amendment; and (3) dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff's remaining Eighth Amendment, due process, and ADA/RA claims against Defendants Dr. Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez, Dr. Lanette Linthicum, Christi McGlothin, and Bobby Lumpkin in their individual and official capacities as frivolous and/or for failure to state a claim for relief. Id. at 21-22. 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

1/2

States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Badaiki v. Schlumberger Holdings Corp., 512 F. Supp. 3d 741, 743-44 (S.D. Tex. 2021) (Eskridge. J.). Having 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. 10). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the following: (1) Plaintiff's ADA and RA claims against Dr. Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez, Dr. Lanette Linthicum, and Bobby Lumpkin in their official capacities are retained at this time. (2) Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for money damages against Dr. Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez, Dr. Lanette Linthicum, Christi McGlothin, and Bobby Lumpkin in their official capacities are DISMISSED without prejudice as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. (3) Plaintiff's remaining Eighth Amendment, due process, and ADA/RA claims against Dr. Isaac Kwarteng, Jerry Sanchez, Dr. Lanette Linthicum, Christi McGlothin, and Bobby Lumpkin in their individual and official capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous and/or for failure to state a claim for relief SO ORDERED. : / | DAV “MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: Corpus Christi, Texas January 5, 2023

2/2