Rosales v. Social Security Administration
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION re: 11 Amended Memorandum and Recommendation. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute.(Signed by Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos) Parties notified.(mserpa, 2)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
March 07, 2017
David J. Bradley, Clerk
§ MISCELLANEOUS ACTION
§ NO. 2:16-MC-00847
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
(D.E. 1). On January 17, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby issued his
Amended Memorandum and Recommendation (D.E. 11), recommending that this action
be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Petitioner was provided proper notice of, and
opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation.
FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections
have been filed.
When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and
recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear
error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and
recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005)
(citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).
Having reviewed the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations
set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation, the Court
ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly,
this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute.
ORDERED this 7th day of March, 2017.
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?