IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

GLOBAL CONSULTING AND § MECHANICAL SERVICES, LLC, § § CIVIL ACTION NO.

§ Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, 5:20-CV-00088-RWS-CMC §

§ v. §

§ WILLIAM J AUSTIN, § § Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff, § §

v. § § JULIUS MATTHEW RANDOLPH § SMOAK SR. AND MELANIE BROOKE § SMOAK, § Third-Party Defendants. §

ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff Global Consulting and Mechanical Services, LLC’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Docket No. 4). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court deny the motion. Docket No. 33 (“Report and Recommendation”). No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation. Because no timely objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected- to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson,

(5th Cir.), cert. denied,

,

(1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). It is accordingly ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 33) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’ s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Docket No. 4) is DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 16th day of February, 2021.

fooher t LO ehirvecls. G2. ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE