Garcia v. Gray et al

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING 4 Report and Recommendations and DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE 1 Complaint. Signed by Judge Robert Pitman. (cc3)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION DOLORIS LYNN GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. DAVID GRAY, et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § 1:24-CV-1049-DII ORDER Before the Court is the report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Dustin Howell concerning Plaintiff Doloris Lynn Garcia’s (“Plaintiff”) complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), (Dkt. 1). (R. & R., Dkt. 4). 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 Howell issued his report and recommendation on October 24, 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.”). While it appears Plaintiff may not have received the report and recommendation, (Dkt. 6), it is Plaintiff’s failure to update her address with the Court that led to her not receiving the report and recommendation. “An unrepresented party . . . must timely inform the court of any change in the 1 party’s or attorney’s mailing address, e-mail address, signature, or telephone or fax number. The court may sanction a party for the party’s . . . failure to do so, including dismissal of the party’s claims or defenses.” W.D. Tex. Loc. R. CV-10(d). 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. 4), is ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s complaint, (Dkt. 1), is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court will enter final judgment by separate order. SIGNED on November 26, 2024. ROBERT PITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?