Garcia v. Pegaso Energy Services, LLC

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING 17 Report and Recommendations and DENYING 7 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim . Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
KEVIN LEE GARCIA,
Plaintiff,
v.
PEGASO ENERGY SERVICES, LLC,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

1:23-CV-790-DII

ORDER
Before the Court is the report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge
Mark Lane concerning Defendant Pegaso Energy Services, LLC’s (“Pegaso”) Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff’s First Amended Collective Action Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6), (Dkt. 7). (R. & R., Dkt. 17). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 1(d) of Appendix C of
the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Judge Lane
issued his report and recommendation on April 11, 2024. (Id.). As of the date of this order, no party
has filed objections to the report and recommendation.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), a party may serve and file specific, written objections to a
magistrate judge’s proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served
with a copy of the report and recommendation and, in doing so, secure de novo review by the
district court. When no objections are timely filed, a district court can review the magistrate’s report
and recommendation for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note (“When no
timely objection is filed, the [district] court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the
face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”).

1

Because no party has filed timely objections, the Court reviews the report and
recommendation for clear error. Having done so and finding no clear error, the Court accepts and
adopts the report and recommendation as its own order.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the Report and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. 17), is ADOPTED. Pegaso’s motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 7), is
DENIED.
SIGNED on May 10, 2024.

ROBERT PITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2