NORTHERN DISTRICK □□□□□ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ee FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AMARILLO DIVISION CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT PAUL THIBODEAUX, § 2 uy by and through Salvador Jimenez, § Petitioner, : V. ; 2:22-CV-172-Z-BR Director, TDCJ-CID, : Respondent. : ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Before the Court are the findings, conclusions, and recommendation (“FCR”) (ECF No. 6) of the United States Magistrate Judge to deny the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) filed by the Petitioner. No objections to the FCR have been filed. After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, the Court concludes the FCR is correct. The Court therefore ADOPTS the FCR and DENIES the Petition. The pending Motion to Proceed as Next Friend filed by Salvador Jimenez (ECF No. 4) is likewise DENIED as moot. Considering the record in this case and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, and

(c), the Court denies a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has failed to make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” Slack v. McDaniel,

(2000); see also Hernandez v. Thaler,

(Sth Cir. 2011). The Court ADOPTS and incorporates by reference the FCR filed in this case in support of its finding that Petitioner has failed to show: (1) reasonable jurists would find this Court’s “assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong”; or (2) reasonable jurists would find

“it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right” and “debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack,

. SO ORDERED. November 4. 2022

MAYTHEW J. KACSMARYK TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE