Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT March 04, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

ALEXIS A APPLES, § Petitioner, VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:21-CV-00142 TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES, ef al., § □

Respondents. ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION ‘Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie Hampton’s Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R). (D.E. 20). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See

(b)(1); FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson,

(Sth Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700,

, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015) (Harmon, J.). Having carefully reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 20).

1/2

Accordingly: (1) The Court construes Petitioner’s petition as a

petition. See (D.E. 1). (2) The Court GRANTS Respondent’s motion for summary judgment (D.E. 15) and DENIES Petitioner’s construed § 2254 petition (D.E. 1). (3) A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. (4) A final judgment will be entered separately. SO ORDERED. S S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: Corpus Christi, Texas March 2022

2/2