IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION

JASON COMPTON, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Action No. 4:20-cv-01223-O-BP § ROBERT MCDONALD, et al., § § Defendants. §

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Before the Court is the Agreed Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice filed on December 8, 2020, requesting dismissal of the case without prejudice and with costs to be borne by the party incurring such costs. ECF No. 8. The Motion reflects that the parties stipulate and agree to the dismissal of the case without prejudice as requested in the Motion. The undersigned therefore RECOMMENDS that United States District Judge Reed O’Connor DISMISS this case WITHOUT PREJUDICE with all costs borne by the party incurring such costs. A copy of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation shall be served on all parties in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to any part of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation must file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with a copy. See

(b)(1) (2019) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1) (2019). In order to be specific, an objection must identify the specific finding or recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for the objection, and specify the place in the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An objection that merely incorporates by reference or refers to the briefing before the magistrate judge is not specific. Failure to file specific written objections will bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge that are accepted or adopted by the district court, except upon grounds of plain error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

(Sth Cir. 1996) (en banc). SIGNED December 9, 2020. Tal Kean hi. Hal R. Ray, Jr. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE