Bradley Wayne Thomas v. Director, TDCJ-CID

E.D. Texas

Bradley Wayne Thomas v. Director, TDCJ-CID

DecidedFebruary 24, 2026

Docket4:25-cv-00983

StatusUnknown

This text of Bradley Wayne Thomas v. Director, TDCJ-CID (Bradley Wayne Thomas v. Director, TDCJ-CID) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bradley Wayne Thomas v. Director, TDCJ-CID, (E.D. Tex. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

BRADLEY WAYNE THOMAS, § § Petitioner, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:25-CV-983-RWS-JBB § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, § § Respondent. §

ORDER This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge J. Boone Baxter. In his amended petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Petitioner Bradley Thomas challenges his 2023 Denton County, Texas conviction for assault family violence causing bodily injury. Docket No. 5 at 3; see also Docket No. 1 at 1. On December 8, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation, recommending the application for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Docket No. 12 at 2. Petitioner, who is not incarcerated, received a copy of the Report and Recommendation via electronic notification. Docket No. 3. To date, Petitioner has not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Because no objections have been received, Petitioner is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. See Duarte v. City of Lewisville, 858 F.3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2017); Arriaga v. Laxminarayan, No. 4:21-CV-00203-RAS, 2021 WL 3287683, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2021). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this case and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) (where no objections to a magistrate judge’s report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 12) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is further ORDERED that, in addition to sending notification electronically, the Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order and the Final Judgment to Bradley Wayne Thomas, 5000 H Lively, Ponder, Texas 76259.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 24th day of February, 2026.

[ache t+ LO Clriecle. □□□ ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

BRADLEY WAYNE THOMAS, § § Petitioner, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:25-CV-983-RWS-JBB § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, § § Respondent. §

ORDER This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge J. Boone Baxter. In his amended petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Petitioner Bradley Thomas challenges his 2023 Denton County, Texas conviction for assault family violence causing bodily injury. Docket No. 5 at 3; see also Docket No. 1 at 1. On December 8, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation, recommending the application for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. Docket No. 12 at 2. Petitioner, who is not incarcerated, received a copy of the Report and Recommendation via electronic notification. Docket No. 3. To date, Petitioner has not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Because no objections have been received, Petitioner is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. See Duarte v. City of Lewisville, 858 F.3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2017); Arriaga v. Laxminarayan, No. 4:21-CV-00203-RAS, 2021 WL 3287683, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2021). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this case and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) (where no objections to a magistrate judge’s report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 12) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is further ORDERED that, in addition to sending notification electronically, the Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order and the Final Judgment to Bradley Wayne Thomas, 5000 H Lively, Ponder, Texas 76259.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 24th day of February, 2026.

[ache t+ LO Clriecle. □□□ ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Bradley Wayne Thomas v. Director, TDCJ-CID, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradley-wayne-thomas-v-director-tdcj-cid-txed-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack