Vasquez v. Building and Standards Commission

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 19, 2021 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk VICTORIA DIVISION ANTONIO J. VASQUEZ, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Action No. 6:20-CV-00072 § BUILDING AND STANDARDS § COMMISSION, § § Defendants. § ORDER ACCEPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Pending before the Court is the December 15, 2020 Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) signed by Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby. (Dkt. No. 2). Magistrate Judge Libby recommends that the Court dismiss pro se Plaintiff Antonio J. Vasquez’s Complaint, (Dkt. No. 1), without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3).1 In the alternative, Magistrate Judge Libby recommends that the Court dismiss Vasquez’s Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Vasquez was provided proper notice and the opportunity to object to the M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Vasquez did not object. As a result, review is straightforward: plain error. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005).

1 Rule 12(h)(3) provides in full: “If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject- matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.” No plain error appears. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS the M&R as the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order. The Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Vasquez’s Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It is SO ORDERED. Signed on October 18, 2021.

DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE