FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT April 30, 2024 ee | Seece py: NM JEREMIAH P. SLAVIT, § □□□□□□ Plaintiff, ; : CIVIL NO. SA-22-CV-01194-OLG PERIPHERAL VASCULAR : ASSOCIATES, P.A., § Defendant. : ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Court has considered United States Magistrate Judge Henry J. Bemporad’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), filed March 15, 2024, concerning Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (See R&R, Dkt. No. 54.) A party who wishes to object to a Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations must serve and file specific written objections within fourteen days. FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). When a party objects to an R&R, the Court must make a de novo determination as to “any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” FED. R. Clv. P. 72(b)(3); see United States. v. Wilson,

(Sth Cir. 1989), cert. denied,

(1989). Objections must be specific; frivolous, conclusory, or general objections need not be considered by the district court. Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n,

(Sth Cir. 1987) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright,

, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. U.S. Auto. Ass'n,

(5th Cir. 1996)). Any portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings or recommendations that were not objected to are reviewed for clear error. Wilson,

. After reviewing the entirety of the R&R de novo, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation is in all things correct. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS the Magistrate

Judge’s R&R (Dkt. No. 54) and, for the reasons set forth therein, Defendant Peripheral Vascular Associates, P.A.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 41) is GRANTED and Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED. It is further ORDERED that all other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. This case is CLOSED. It isso ORDERED.

SIGNED this a day of April, 2024.

ORLANDO L. GARCIA United States District Judge