MidFirst Bank v. Brandi Berry, et al.

Opinion

Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT December 30, 2028 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION MIDFIRST BANK, § Plaintiff, : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00072 BRANDI BERRY, ef al., : Defendants. : ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”’). (D.E. 29). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, L.P., No.4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL3823141,at*1(S.D. Tex. June 18,2015) (Harmon, J.) (citation omitted). Havingreviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is notclearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 29). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the parties’ Joint Motion for Entry of Second Amended Agreed Order as to the Interests of Minors G.S. and B.S. (D.E. 28). The Court will enter the agreed order separately.

SO ORDERED.

S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas December 30, 2026