Opinion
Civil Action 1:23-cv-177
05-10-2023
ROBERT CALDWELL #933046 v. TDC EMPLOYEES, ET AL.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHRISTINE L. STETSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Robert Caldwell, an inmate at the Stiles Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed a letter notifying the court of his desire to file a complaint against TDC employees and medical staff. In order to preserve Plaintiff's limitations period, the letter was liberally construed as a civil rights lawsuit and filed as the above-styled action.
The above-styled action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636 and the 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.
Analysis
Sanctions
In Caldwell v. Quarterman, the Fifth Circuit imposed monetary sanctions in the amount of $100.00 against Plaintiff for filing frivolous motions and Applications for COA. See Caldwell v. Quarterman, No. 07-40373 (5th Cir. Dec. 11, 2007). This sanction was in addition to the $100 sanction imposed in Caldwell v. Quarterman, No. 07-40658, and the $100 sanction imposed in Caldwell v. Quarterman, No. 07-40780. Id. Additionally, the Fifth Circuit ordered that clerks of all federal district courts within this circuit are directed to refuse to file any pro se civil complaint or appeal unless Plaintiff submits proof of satisfaction of the $300 in sanctions. Id.
In this case, Plaintiff did not submit proof of satisfaction of the $300 in sanctions imposed by the Fifth Circuit. Thus, Plaintiff is barred from bringing this action based on the sanctions previously imposed by the Fifth Circuit. Accordingly, the above-styled action should be dismissed.
Recommendation
Plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed without prejudice.
Objections
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).
Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations contained within this report within fourteen days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from the entitlement of de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.