Vasquez v. Kwartang

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT August 18, 2021 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

ALFREDO VASQUEZ, § § Plaintiff, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-CV-098 § ISAAC KWARTANG, et al, § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION On July 16, 2021, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation to Deny Plaintiff’s Motions for Temporary Restraining Order and for Preliminary Injunction” (M&R, D.E. 54). The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. 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 M&R 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 M&R. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services 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 M&R (D.E. 54), 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, the motion for temporary restraining order and for preliminary injunction (D.E. 45) is DENIED. ORDERED this 18th day of August, 2021. Jel GONZALES RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2