Johnson v. Kwiatkowski

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 15, 2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

ROBERT W JOHNSON, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00202 § ARI KWIATKOWSKI, § § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION On September 9, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 7), recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice for improper venue. Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. Notice has been returned to the Court as undeliverable and Plaintiff has failed to keep the Court apprised of his current address. No objections have been timely filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).

Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 7), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, this action DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

ORDERED on October 15, 2024.

GONZAIGS RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2/2