Neisen v. Nueces County District Attorney's Office

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT September 17, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

HEATHER NEISEN, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00174 § NUECES COUNTY DISTRICT § ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On August 27, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby issued his “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 10), recommending that this Court grant Defendant Nueces County District Attorney’s Office’s motion to dismiss (D.E. 5). 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. 10), 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, Defendant’s motion to dismiss (D.E. 5) is GRANTED and all claims against the Nueces County District Attorney’s Office are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. ORDERED on September 17, 2025. [eke GONZAIGS RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2