Gomez v. Palomo
Gomez v. Palomo
Trial Court Opinion
Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT June 27, 2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk BROWNSVILLE DIVISION ARMANDO GOMEZ, § “Plaintiff,” § Vv. ; Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-00098 JACOBB PALOMO, “Defendant.” § ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the “Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) (Dkt. No. 80). The R&R recommends this Court (1) grant Defendant’s “Motion to Dismiss” (“MTD”) (Dkt. No. 66); (2) dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff's claims; and (3) direct the Clerk of the Court to close this case. Objections were due June 20, 2024. No objections were filed by either party. If there have been no objections to the magistrate’s ruling, then the appropriate standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.” United States y. Wilson,
864 F.2d 1219, 1221(5th Cir. 1989). Finding no clear error, abuse of discretion, or finding contrary to law, the R&R (Dkt. No. 80) is ADOPTED. For these reasons, Defendant’s MTD (Dkt. No. 66) is granted. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant are DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to close this case,
Signed on this “<5 ny day of N\ , 2024. KE United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown