UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT April 30, 2020 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS David J. Bradley, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

HUMBERTO ROSALES CRUZ, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:19-CV-297 § RODRIGUEZ, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R), entered on March 9, 2020. (D.E. 36). The M&R recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen Complaint. (D.E. 31). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See

(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 memorandum and recommendation is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson,

(5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700,

, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015). Having carefully 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. 36). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen Complaint. (D.E. 31).

SIGNED and ORDERED this 30th day of April 2020.

DAVID S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE