Amaru v. Rhome Police Department et al

Filing 128

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 123 Findings and Recommendations on Motion: it is ORDERED that the Plaintiffs' constitutional challenges (ECF Nos. 74 - 75 ; and ECF N os. 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 61 containing earlier versions of these challenges) are DENIED, Defendants' Motions (ECF Nos. 23 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 98 , 100 , 102 , 106 ) are GRANTED, and Plaintiffs' claims are DISMISSED with leave to amend, except as to their claims based on criminal law and those asserted on behalf of their minor children, which are dismissed without leave to amend. If Plaintiffs wish to amend their Complaint (ECF No. 4 ) to address the legal deficiencies i dentified in the United States Magistrate Judge's Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation (ECF No. 123 ), they SHALL FILE a First Amended Complaint on or before fourteen days from the date of this Order. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 8/30/2024) (sre)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH DIVISION
QUKULKHAN SHAHBAZ NAGAQIXI
AMARU, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
RHOME POLICE DEPARTMENT,
et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-01090-O-BP
(Consolidated with Civil Action No. 4:22cv-01096-P-BJ)

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. No objections were filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is ripe for
review. The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District Judge believes that the Findings and
Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and
Conclusions of the Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ constitutional challenges (ECF Nos. 7475; and ECF Nos. 37, 38, 39, 40, 61 containing earlier versions of these challenges) are DENIED,
Defendants’ Motions (ECF Nos. 23, 28, 29, 30, 98, 100, 102, 106) are GRANTED, and Plaintiffs’
claims are DISMISSED with leave to amend, except as to their claims based on criminal law and
those asserted on behalf of their minor children, which are dismissed without leave to amend.
If Plaintiffs wish to amend their Complaint (ECF No. 4) to address the legal deficiencies
identified in the United States Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation

(ECF No. 123), they SHALL FILE a First Amended Complaint on or before fourteen days from
the date of this Order.
SO ORDERED on this 30th day of August, 2024.

_____________________________________
Reed O’Connor
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2