Case Information
*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS RALPH LYNN FERGUSON , JR . , §
Plaintiff, §
§ versus §
§ ERIC MARCINE DUNN, CHARLES § CASE NO. 1:16-CV-00272-MAC WILLIS, JOSH BECKMAN, BRANDON §
THURMAN, TIMOTHY WAYNE §
CORKERN, STEVE HOLLOWAY, §
PARVIN BUTLER, ANGIE BROWN, §
PETE PATRICK, GWEN KELLY, LINDA §
PITTS, ASHLEY MORROW, J KEITH §
STANLEY, §
Defendants. §
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The court has received the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Zack Hawthorn, which recommends granting Defendant Eric Marcine Dunn’s (Dunn) “Motion for Summary Judgment” (Doc. No. 184) and dismissing pro se Plaintiff Ralph Lynn Ferguson Jr.’s (Ferguson) Fourth Amendment unlawful search and Fourth Amendment unlawful seizure claims.
A party who files timely, written objections to a magistrate judge’s report and . ________________________________________ recommendation is entitled to a de novo determination of those findings or recommendations to which the party specifically objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); F ED . R. C IV . P. 72(b)(2)-(3). “Parties filing objections must specifically identify those findings [to which they object]. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court.” Nettles v. Wainwright , 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n , 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
Ferguson raises several objections to Judge Hawthorn’s report, but these objections are largely a restatement of his arguments in his response and sur-reply to Dunn’s “Motion for Summary Judgment.” See Doc. Nos. 198, 201. After considering Ferguson’s objections, the court finds they are without merit and that Judge Hawthorn’s findings and conclusions are correct.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s “Report and Recommendation” (Doc. No. 202) is GRANTED , and Ferguson’s Fourth Amendment unlawful seizure and Fourth Amendment unlawful search claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
A Final Judgment will be entered separately. SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 7th day of September, 2004.
SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 1st day of February, 2019. 2 of 2
