Filed: Jan. 10, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 10, 2020
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE JEREMY D. KERNODLE , District Judge . This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636. On November 18, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 9), recommending that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 7) be granted. No written objections have been filed. This Court reviews th
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE JEREMY D. KERNODLE , District Judge . This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636. On November 18, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 9), recommending that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 7) be granted. No written objections have been filed. This Court reviews the..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
JEREMY D. KERNODLE, District Judge.
This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On November 18, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 9), recommending that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 7) be granted. No written objections have been filed.
This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days). Here, Plaintiff did not file objections. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate Judge's findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews her legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge's Report are filed, the standard of review is "clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law").
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations, the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. The Court therefore adopts the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 9) as the findings of this Court.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 9) is ADOPTED and that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 7) is GRANTED. This civil action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All pending motions are DENIED as MOOT.
So ordered.
