Lucero v. Diaz

Filing 9

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. 6 ), is ADOPTED. Plaintiffs cause of action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (pg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AUSTIN DIVISION
ANDRES LUCERO,
Plaintiff,
v.
RAY DIAZ,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

1:24-CV-958-DII

ORDER
Before the Court is the report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge
Mark Lane concerning Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, (Dkt. 2), and Affidavit in
Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, (Dkt. 5). (R. & R., Dkt. 6). 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 October 16, 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 judge’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.”).
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.

1

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the Report and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. 6), is ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s cause of action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SIGNED on November 25, 2024.

ROBERT PITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2