UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT January 13, 2021 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk MCALLEN DIVISION

ALBERTO MUNOZ-CEDILLO JR. § § Movant, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 7:20-CV-00110 § CRIM. ACTION NO. 7:18-CR-1586 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, § § Respondent. §

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Movant Alberto Munoz-Cedillo, Jr.’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct sentence pursuant to

, which had been referred to the Magistrate Court for a report and recommendation. On November 27, 2020, the Magistrate Court issued the Report and Recommendation, recommending that Movant’s § 2255 motion be DENIED pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure based on Movant’s failure to prosecute, and that Movant’s civil action be DISMISSED. It was further recommended that a Certificate of Appealability be DENIED. The time for filing objections has passed, and no objections have been filed. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error.1 Finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Movant’s § 2255 motion is DENIED pursuant to

1 As noted by the Fifth Circuit, “[t]he advisory committee’s note to Rule 72(b) states that, ‘[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the [district] court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.’” Douglas v. United States Service Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (1983)) superseded by statute on other grounds by

(b)(1), as stated in ACS Recovery Servs., Inc. v. Griffin, No. 11-40446,

, at *7 n.5 (5th Cir. April 2, 2012). Rule 41(b). Finally, Movant’s civil action is DISMISSED, and a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DONE at McAllen, Texas, this 13th day of January, 2021. WW Was Micaela Alvarez United States District Judge

2/2