Sherman v. Allison et al

Filing 10

ORDER Accepting Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge re 8 Findings and Recommendations on Case. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 6/3/2015) (ult)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH DIVISION

TALEK SHERMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
DENISE ALLISON and BBVA
COMPASS,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 4:14-cv-583-O

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in
this case. See ECF No. 8. No objections were filed.1 The District Court reviewed the proposed
findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the
United States Magistrate Judge are accepted as the findings of the Court. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s
Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.
SO ORDERED on this 3rd day of June, 2015.
_____________________________________
Reed O’Connor
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1

On May 27, 2015, Plaintiff filed a letter with the Court in which Plaintiff stated he “wish[ed] to appeal the
decision of the Magistrate Judge,” and Plaintiff requested that his case be “referred to the district judge for
further action.” See Pl.’s Letter, ECF No. 9. Plaintiff makes no specific references to the Findings,
Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the Court finds that
Plaintiff’s letter does not constitute an objection to the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the
United States Magistrate Judge. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) (“[A] party may serve and file specific written
objections to the proposed findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis added).