Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Jeremy P. Spencer, Petitioner v. Lieutenant Minter, et al.

https://ecf.txed.uscourts.gov/doc 1/175110305816

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:txed-CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. Di...

Case l:16-cv-00096-TH-ZJH Document 31 Filed 01/02/19 Page 1 of 1 PagelD #:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

JEREMY P. SPENCER

§

VS.

§

LIEUTENANT MINTER, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. I:16cv96

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Jeremy P. Spencer, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled civil rights lawsuit. The ■

referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge

consideration pursuant to applicable orders of this court. The Magistrate Judge has submit

Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge recommending that this ca;

dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United S

Magistrate Judge, along with the record and pleadings.

No objections to the Report

Recommendation were filed by the parties.

ORDER

Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are cc

and the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. A final judgment shall be entered dismi;

this lawsuit.

SIGNED this the 2 day of January, 2019.

Thad Heartheld

United States District Judge

1 of 1

V

6/15/2020, 8:39 AM

Case l:16-cv-00096-TH-ZJH Document 29 Filed 10/02/18 Page 1 of 2 PagelD #: 151

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

JEREMY P. SPENCER

§

VS.

§

LIEUTENANT MINTER, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16cv96

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff JeremyP. Spencer, proceeding/?rose, filed this civil rights lawsuit. Thismatterwas

referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the

Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States

Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition

of the case.

Procedural Background

The court previously entered an order directing plaintiff to provide the court with the full

names of the defendants and an address at which each defendant could be served with process. The

time for complying with the order has expired. However, plaintiff has not provided the court with

any full names or addresses.

Discussion

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action based

upon a plaintiffs failure to prosecute or failure to comply with any court order. Larson v. Scott, 157

F.3d 1030,1031 (5th Cir. 1998). “This authority [under Rule 41(b)] flows from the court's inherent

power to control its docket and prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases.” Boudwin

v. Graystone Insurance Co., Ltd., 756 F.2d 399, 401 (5th Cir. 1985) (citing Link v. Wabash, R.R.

Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629 (1962)).

By failing to comply with the court order described above, plaintiff has failed to diligently

prosecute this civil rights lawsuit. As a result, this case should be dismissed for want of prosecution.

Case l:16-cv-00096-TH-ZJH Document 29 Filed 10/02/18 Page 2 of 2 PagelD #: 152

Recommendation

This civil rights lawsuit should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

Objections

Objections must be (1) specific, (2) in writing, and (3) served and filed within 14 days after

being served with a copy of this report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. ClV. P. 6(a), 6(b) and 72(b).

A party’s failure to timely file objections to this Report and Recommendation will bar that

party from (1) entitlement to de novo review by a district judge of proposed findings and

recommendations, Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988), and (2) appellate

review, except on grounds of plain error, of unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions

accepted by the district court, Douglass v. United Serv. Auto. Ass’n., 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir.

1996) (en banc).

SIGNED this 2nd day of October, 2018.

Zack Hawthorn

United States Magistrate Judge

2

https://ecf.txed.uscourts.gov/docl/175110975783

CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. District Court:txed-CM/ECF LIVE - U.S. Di...

Case l:16-cv-00096-TH-ZJH Document 40 Filed 01/14/20 Page 1 of 1 PagelD #:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

JEREMY SPENCER

§

VS.

§

LIEUTENANT MINTER, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

A Final Judgment was previously entered dismissing this case. Plaintiff then filed a n

of appeal and two motions seeking to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (doc. nos. 38 and

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), prisoners are prohibited from proceeding in forma pauj.

either at the district court level or on appeal, if at least three of their prior lawsuits or appeals

been dismissed as frivolous or malicious, or for failing to state a claim upon which relief m:

granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Prior to the date on which plaintiff filed his notice of appeal, courts had dismissed at

three lawsuits filed by plaintiff as frivolous or for failure to state a claim,

Plaintiff ha:

demonstrated he was in “imminent danger of serious physical injury” on the date he filed his n

of appeal. Accordingly, Section 1915(g) bars plaintiff from proceeding with his appeal on

forma pauperis basis.

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, plaintiffs motions to proceed in forma pauperis on aj

are DENIED.

SIGNED this the 14 day of January, 2020.

Thad Heartfield

United States District Judge

Snp.nr.p.r v Ardnin. No. 1:16cv94 /FT). Tex. Anr. 24. 201 7) /dismissed as frivolous and for failure t<

1 Of 1

6/15/2020, 8:38 AM

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

SjsSsf

No. 19-40898

A True Copy

Certified order issued Feb 18, 2020

JEREMY P. SPENCER,

Plaintiff - Appellant

Ul. CcUjO.

Clerk, UvS. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

v.

MINTER, Lieutenant; RICHARD, Correctional Officer; TINKER,

Correctional Officer; LEBLANC, Correctional Officer,

Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas

CLERK'S OFFICE:

Under 5th ClR. R. 42.3, the appeal is dismissed as of February 18, 2020,

for want of prosecution. The appellant failed to timely pay the fee.

LYLE W. CAYCE

Clerk of the United States Court

of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

By:

Christina A. Gardner, Deputy Clerk

ENTERED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COURT