Ortiz v. Martinez Perez

Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT September 21, 202 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk BROWNSVILLE DIVISION ALEJANDRO ORTIZ, § “Plaintiff”. v. : . Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-00021 CESAR MARTINEZ PEREZ, ET AL., “Defendants”. § § ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court are these pleadings: Plaintiff’s “Original Petition, Request for Temporary Restraining Order and Temporary Injunction, Request for Disclosure, Request for Admission, Request for Production, and First Set of Interrogatories to Defendants” (“Complaint”) (Dkt. No. 1-6), Defendant Jams Logistics, LLC d/b/a Benitez Transport’s (“Defendant Jams”) “Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support” (““MSJ’) (Dkt. No. 15), and the “Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) (Dkt. No. 15).

The R&R recommends this Court grant Defendant Jams’ MSJ (Dkt. No. 15) based on Plaintiff's failure to respond or otherwise contest the MSJ’s factual or legal allegations. See id. at 4, Objections were due August 25, 2021. FED.R.CIV.P. 72(a). No objections were filed by either party. When no objections are filed to a magistrate judge’s ruling, the district court applies the “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law” standard of review. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989). Finding no clear error, abuse of discretion, or finding contrary to law, the R&R is ADOPTED.

Thus, Defendant Jams’ MSJ (Dkt. No. 15) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs claims in the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1-6) relative to Defendant Jams are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

Signed on this GY eS day of De chor oe, 2021.

□□□ Le United States District Judge