1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

ESAW LAMPKIN, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

CHAPLAIN JERRY CORDER, et al., 

 Defendants. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Case No. 6:23-cv-402-JDK-JDL 

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Plaintiff Esaw Lampkin, a former Henderson County Jail inmate proceeding 

pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was 

referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact, 

conclusions of law, and recommendations for disposition. 

On September 7, 2023, Judge Love issued a Report recommending that the 

Court dismiss this case with prejudice for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), but without prejudice as to the refiling of his lawsuit 

without seeking in forma pauperis status and payment of the full filing fee. Docket 

No. 6. A copy of the Report was mailed to Plaintiff at his last-known address, but 

was returned as undeliverable. Docket No. 7. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the 

Report or updated his address. 

This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de 

novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and 

Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court 

Case 6:23-cv-00402-JDK-JDL Document 8 Filed 12/01/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 49
2 

examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. 

Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), 

superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to 

file objections from ten to fourteen days). 

Here, Plaintiff did not object in the prescribed period. The Court therefore 

reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and 

reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See 

United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 

918 (1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the 

standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). 

Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and the record in this case, 

the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to 

law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 6) as the findings of this Court and 

DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice for purposes of proceeding in forma 

pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) but without prejudice as to the refiling of his 

lawsuit without seeking in forma pauperis status and payment of the full filing fee. 

Plaintiff may also resume this lawsuit by paying the entire filing fee of $402 within 

thirty days after entry of this order. 

So ORDERED and SIGNED this day of

___________________________________

JEREMY D. KERNODLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1st December, 2023.

Case 6:23-cv-00402-JDK-JDL Document 8 Filed 12/01/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 50