Opinion
Civil Action No. 3:04-CV-0480-L.
June 30, 2004
ORDER
Before the court are the Supplemental Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge ("Report"), filed June 14, 2004; Plaintiff's Objection to the Supplemental Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, filed June 28, 2004; and Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint.
Plaintiff moves to amend his complaint. The decision to allow amendment of pleadings is within the sound discretion of the court. Norman v. Apache Corp., 19 F.3d 1017, 1021 (5th Cir. 1994). In determining whether to allow an amendment of the pleadings, the court considers the following: undue delay in the proceedings, undue prejudice to the opposing parties, timeliness of the amendment, and futility of the amendment. See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana v. Harry L. Laws Co., Inc., 690 F.2d 1157, 1163 (5th Cir. 1982). Here, the court determines that allowing Plaintiff to amend would be futile. Plaintiff did not submit a proposed amended pleading as required by the Local Civil Rules, and has not otherwise identified to the court any proposed changes that would cure the Complaint's deficiencies. To the extent Plaintiff relies on his objections, the court determines that they do not state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The court therefore determines that any amendment would be futile. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend is denied.
Having reviewed the pleadings, record, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge, and Plaintiff's objections, the court determines that the findings and conclusions are correct. Plaintiff's objections are overruled, and the findings and conclusions are hereby accepted as those of the court. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is dismissed with prejudice as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b).
It is so ordered.