Eli Trevino v. Martin J O'Malley, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT November 20, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

ELI TREVINO, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00177 § MARTIN J O'MALLEY, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On October 24, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 20), recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees (D.E. 18) be granted. The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed. When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)). Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 20), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Trevino’s motion for attorney’s fees (D.E. 18) is GRANTED and the Court ORDERS that Trevino’s attorney of record is awarded the sum of $8,389.71 in attorney’s fees pursuant to the EAJA. In accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 591-98 (2010), the attorney fee award is ORDERED to be made payable to Plaintiff, Eli Trevino, and mailed in care of his attorney, Lindsey M. Sbrolla. ORDERED on November 20, 20235.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2