govinfo:USCOURTS-txed-1_25-cv-00439-1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
LARRY T. LINARES §
VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:25-CV-439
D. LANGLEY, et al., §
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS 
AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, Larry T. Linares, an inmate formerly confined at the Stiles Unit of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaining of events which occurred while he was
incarcerated at the Mark Stiles Unit. The Court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack
Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to
applicable laws and orders of this Court. 
On May 21, 2026, the magistrate judge recommended denying Plaintiff’s request for
preliminary injunctive relief [Dkt. 98]. The Court has received and considered the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the
records, and pleadings. Plaintiff filed Objections [Dkt. 103]. This requires a de novo review of the
objections in relation to the pleadings and applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). 
Plaintiff’s objections can be summarized as continued complaints that he is being subjected
to “torturous heat, pulsation, shocking and current through electromagnetic induction apparatus.” 
While Plaintiff asserts that this has occurred at the Stiles Unit, the Connally Unit, and the Byrd Unit,
Plaintiff ignores the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning that preliminary injunctive relief cannot be granted
against Defendants who are not currently part of this lawsuit. The above-referenced complaint
involves allegations of constitutional violations against Defendants at the Mark Stiles Unit. The
Magistrate Judge noted that Plaintiff was free to file a request for preliminary injunctive relief against
Defendants at the Connally Unit where he is currently incarcerated. As a result, Plaintiff’s requests PageID #: 
<pageID>
for preliminary injunctive relief [Dkt. 32, 33, 38, 61 & 64] are denied. 
ORDER
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions
of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED.
2
____________________________ 
Michael J. Truncale
United States District Judge
SIGNED this 16th day of June, 2026. PageID #: 
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight