Miranda v. Lumpkin

Opinion

Southem District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT January 04, 2023 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION DOMINGO MIRANDA, § Plaintiff. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:21-CV-00271 BOBBY LUMPKIN, ai., Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation (*“M&R"”). (D.E. 39). The M&R recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff's Declaration for Entry of Default, (D.E. 37), which the M&R construes “as a motion for entry of default judgment.” (D.E. 39, p. 1). 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 1s clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Badaiki v. Schlumberger Holdings Corp., 512 F. Supp. 3d 741, 743-44 (S.D. Tex. 2021) (Eskridge, J.). Having reviewed 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 not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 1/2

39). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Declaration for Entry of Default. (D.E. 37). SO ORDERED. □ DA S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: Corpus Christi, Texas January 4, 2023

2/2