West v. Ruiz

• Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
• Decided: March 27, 2020
• Docket: 2:18-cv-00170
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

Southern District of Texas ENTERED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT March 27, 2020 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS David J. Bradley, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MICHAEL RAY WEST, § Plaintiff, VS. § CIVIL NO. 2:18-CV-170 SHARON RUIZ, et al, Defendants. ORDER The Court is in receipt of the Magistrate Judges Memorandum and Recommendation to Grant Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and to Deny Plaintiffs Motion for an Injunction (“M&R”), Dkt. No. 64. The Court is also in receipt of Plaintiff Michael Ray West’s (“West”) Objections, Dkt. Nos. 67, 69. The Court reviews objected-to portions of a Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings and recommendations de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). But if the objections are frivolous, conclusive or general in nature the court need not conduct a de novo review. Battle v. United States Parole Comm'n, 834 F.2d 419 (5th Cir. 1987). After review, the Court concludes West’s objections are frivolous and conclusive and adequately addressed by the M&R. Dkt. No. 64. After independently reviewing the filings, the record, and applicable law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety, Dkt. No. 64, and OVERRULES West’s Objections, Dkt. Nos. 67, 69. The Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Dkt. No. 48, and DISMISSES West’s deliberate indifference claims for failure to exhaust with prejudice. The Court DENIES West’s motion for an injunction, Dkt. No. 60. Final judgment will enter separately. SIGNED this 27th day of March, “Ij Senior United States District Judge

1/1