Cedric Earl Hill v. Joseph Moran, Arika Austin, Terrell Ellis, James Alexander, Matthew Chorzewski, Andres Padilla, Gregory Swiger, Blake Zimmermann, Brice Bishop

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

CEDRIC EARL HILL, § Plaintiff, § § v. § CASE NO. 1:25-CV-00370-ADA-ML § JOSEPH MORAN, ARIKA AUSTIN, § TERRELL ELLIS, JAMES § ALEXANDER, MATTHEW § CHORZEWSKI, ANDRES PADILLA, § GREGORY SWIGER, BLAKE § ZIMMERMANN, BRICE BISHOP, § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Mark Lane. Dkt. 35. Judge Lane recommends that this Court GRANT Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 29). Id. at 12. Additionally, Judge Lane recommends that this suit be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJDICE. Id. The report was filed on March 12, 2026. This Court hereby adopts Judge Lane’s Recommendations. A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation, thereby securing de novo review by the district court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). A district court need not consider “[f]rivolous, conclusive, or general objections.” Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996)). Plaintiff filed objections on March 25, 2026. Dkt. 37. Defendants filed a Response to Plaintiff’s Objections on April 1, 2026. Dkt. 39. The Court has conducted de novo review of the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 35), Plaintiffs objections (Dkt. 37), Defendants’ Response (Dkt. 39), and the applicable facts and laws. After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations should be adopted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Lane (Dkt. 35) is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs objections (Dkt. 37) are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 29) is hereby GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this suit is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

SIGNED this 15" day of April, 2026.

eh ALAN D ALBRIGHT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG