De Los Reyes v. State Farm Lloyds

District Court, S.D. Texas

De Los Reyes v. State Farm Lloyds

Trial Court Opinion

Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT November 28, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk BROWNSVILLE DIVISION ESTUARDO DE LOS REYES, § “Plaintiff,” § Civil Action No. 1:22-cv-000071 STATE FARM LLOYDS, “Defendant.” § ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court are these pleadings: Defendant’s “Motion to Limit Attorney’s Fees” (“Motion”) (Dkt. No. 1-2 at 35-36), Plaintiff's “Response” to Defendant’s Motion, with accompanying exhibits (Dkt. No. 19), Defendant’s “Reply” with an exhibit in support of its Motion (Dkt. No 20), and Plaintiffs “Sur-Reply” (Dkt. No. 21). Along with these submissions, the Court received: (1) Plaintiff's “Opposed Renewed Motion to Compel Appraisal and Abate Judicial Proceedings” (“Renewed Motion’) with exhibits (Dkt. No.18); (2) Defendant’s opposed “Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Sur-Rely” (“Motion to Strike”) (Dkt. No. 22); (3) Plaintiff's “Response to Defendant’s Motion to Strike.” (Dkt. No. 24); and the “Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) (Dkt. No. 25). The R&R recommends this Court: (1) deny Plaintiff s Renewed Motion (Dkt. No. 18); (2) grant Defendant’s Motion (Dkt. No. 1-2 at 35-36); (3) deny Defendant’s Motion to Strike (Dkt. No. 22); and (4) grant Defendant’s alternative request for “21 days to file a Response addressing Plaintiffs request for a voluntary dismissal” (Dkt. No. 22 at 2). 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. Plaintiffs Renewed Motion (Dkt. No.18) is DENIED. Defendant’s Motion (Dkt. No. 1-2 at 35-36) is GRANTED. Defendant’s Motion to Strike (Dkt. No. 22) is DENIED. Defendants alternative request “21 days to file a Response addressing Plaintiff's request for a voluntary dismissal” (Dkt. No. 22 at 2) is GRANTED.

Wn Signed on this day of ( lovDem L, es, 2022.

Rolghdo Olvera United States District Jud

Reference

Status
Unknown