WILLIAMS v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

• Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
• Decided: February 5, 2025
• Docket: 6:24-cv-00321
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:24-cv-000321 Jay Williams, Plaintiff, v. United States Department of Justice, Defendant.

ORDER Plaintiff Jay Williams, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights proceeding pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Doc. 1. The case was transferred from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania —where plaintiff had originally filed in an apparent attempt to evade sanctions from this court—and referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love. See Doc. 5 at 1-2. The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that this lawsuit be dismissed, without prejudice, as barred by sanctions and sovereign immunity. Doc. 5. The magistrate judge also recommended that plaintiff be warned that further attempts to evade this court’s sanctions may result in the imposition of further sanctions and that plaintiff be denied leave to file this action 7 forma pauperis. Id. at 3. A copy of this report was sent to plaintiff at his last known address. To date, however, plaintiff has not filed objections. When there have been no timely objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). The objection period in this case has long since expired. Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its

findings and recommendation. Plaintiff’s lawsuit is dismissed, without prejudice. Any pending motions are hereby denied as moot. So ordered by the court on February 5, 2025. _fLacbok BARKER United States District Judge

_2-