Banda v. Cappuccio

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION BY: ______________N __M ________________ DEPUTY CHRISTOPHER P. O. BANDA, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § § NO. SA-23-CV-00946-OLG-RBF ELLIOT S. CAPPUCCIO, RYAN § QUIROZ, and PULMAN, § CAPPUCCIO, & PULLEN, LLP, § § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Court has considered United States Magistrate Judge Richard B. Farrer’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), filed February 26, 2025, concerning the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (Dkt. Nos. 18 & 21). (See R&R, Dkt. No. 47.) Any party who desires to object to a Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations must serve and file specific written objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the findings and recommendations. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2). The parties, through counsel, were electronically served with a copy of the R&R on February 27, 2025, and the time to object has passed. Because no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge’s findings or recommendations, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989); cf. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which an objection is made.”) Upon review, the Court finds that the R&R is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, and, for the reasons set forth therein, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 18) and the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff (Dkt. No. 21) are DENIED. It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 17th day of March, 2025. C\ Sn \- Lo ORLANDO L. GARCIA United States District Judge