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

MICHAEL GUISTO CROMEY, JR., § §

§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-00169-RWS Plaintiff, §

§ v. §

§ DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, § § Defendant. §

ORDER Michael Guisto Cromey, Jr., proceeding pro se, filed what has been construed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court referred this matter to the United States Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending the petition be dismissed without prejudice as improvidently filed. Docket No. 4. Petitioner acknowledged receipt of the Report and Recommendation on January 12, 2021. Docket No. 5. The parties had 14 days from receipt of the Report and Recommendation to file objections. To date, no objections have been filed. Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report have been filed, neither party is entitled to de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions and recommendations, and except upon grounds of plain error, they are barred from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. 28 U.S.C § 636(b)(1)(C); Douglass v. United Services Automobile Assoc.,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s report and agrees with the report. See United States v. Raddatz,

(1980) (“[T]he statute permits the district court to give to the magistrate’s proposed findings of fact and recommendations ‘such weight as [their] merit commands and the sound discretion of the judge warrants.’ ”) (quoting Mathews v. Weber,

, 275 (1976)). As Petitioner subsequently indicated he did not intend his original correspondence to be filed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, this matter was improvidently filed. Accordingly, finding no plain error in the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court. It is therefore ORDERED that this petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice as improvidently filed. An appropriate Final Judgment shall be entered dismissing the petition. SIGNED this Ist day of March, 2021.

[echer t+ LO Blrripects G2, ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2