UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT March 04, 2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk HOUSTON DIVISION

IRIS HERNANDEZ, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § Civil Case No. 4:22-CV-03633 § MARTIN O'MALLEY, § § Defendant. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pending before the Court is the February 16, 2024 Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) prepared by Magistrate Judge Peter Bray. (Dkt. No. 18). Judge Bray made findings and conclusions and recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. No. 13), be denied; that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. No. 16), be granted; and that Defendant’s final decision be affirmed. (Dkt. No. 18). The Parties were provided proper notice and the opportunity to object to the M&R. See

(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No party filed an objection. As a result, review is straightforward: plain error. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc.,

(5th Cir. 2005). No plain error appears. Accordingly, the Court accepts the M&R and adopts it as the opinion of the Court. It is therefore ordered that: (1) Judge Bray’s M&R (Dkt. No. 18) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; (2) — Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. No. 13), is DENIED; (3) | Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 16), is GRANTED; and (4) Defendant's final decision is AFFIRMED. It is SO ORDERED. Signed on March 4, 2024.

DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE