Potter v. Rachel

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:22-cv-00452 Rachel Potter, Plaintiff, V. Luke Rachel et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff filed this action asserting claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 1. On February 24, 2023, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the motion to dismiss and alternative mo- tion for rule 7(a) reply be denied. Doc. 13. No party filed written ob- jections. When a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s report, the court reviews the record only for clear error. See Douglass ». United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (Sth Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report and being satis- fied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. The court denies the motion to dismiss and alter- native motion for rule 7(a) reply. So ordered by the court on August 10, 2023. _[Lacbok BARKER United States District Judge