UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

JOHN WILSON, JOHN ARNOLD, § ROY COVEY, JAMES BRENT ENSEY, § EDGAR KELLEHER, BRIAN LOGAN, § TERRY S. MARTIN, ROBERT ROB- § ERTSON, JACOB WILSON, MITCH- § CIVIL NO. 1:17-CV-00453-ADA-JCM ELL BRADFORD, RICHARD LU- § THER, JOHN CRAFT, DANIEL § JOHNSON, JASON DILLARD, § RONALD ATTERBURY, § § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § CITY OF WACO, TEXAS, et al, § § Defendants. §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey C. Manske. ECF No. 79. The report recommends that Defendants Frost and Schwartz’s Motions to Dismiss (ECF No. 26, 43, 46, 49, 52, 55); Defendants Abelino Reyna and McLennan County’s Motions to Dismiss (ECF No. 27, 44, 47, 50, 53, 56); Defendants City of Waco, Brent Stroman, Manuel Chavez, Robert Lanning, Jeffrey Rogers, and Patrick Swanton’s Motions to Dis- miss (ECF No. 28, 45, 48, 51, 54, 57); and the City of Waco’s Supplement to its Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 76) be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The report specifically rec- ommends that the following claims be DISMISSED: Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment claims against each Defendant; Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment Malley claims against each Defendant; Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment Franks claims against Stroman, Lanning, Swanton, Rogers, Frost, and Schwartz; Plaintiffs’ conspiracy claims; Plaintiffs’ claims against the City of Waco; and Plain- tiffs’ claims against the County. The report further recommends that Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Franks claims against Reyna and Chavez be DENIED. The report and recom- mendation was filed on July 19, 2024. A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and rec- ommendation, thereby securing de novo review by the district court.

(b); Fed. R.

Civ. P. 72(b). A district court need not consider “[f]rivolous, conclusive, or general objections.” Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n,

(5th Cir. 1987) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright,

, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996)). Defendant Abelino “Abel” Reyna and McLennan County filed objection and amended ob- jections on July 26, 2024. ECF No. 80, 81. Defendant Manuel Chavez filed objections on July 26, 2024. ECF No. 82. After the Court granted leave to file, Plaintiffs filed objections on August 9, 2024. ECF No. 85. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the motion to dismiss, the re- sponses, the report and recommendation, the objections to the report and recommendation, and the

applicable laws. After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendation should be adopted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey C. Manske., ECF No. 79, is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ and Plaintiff’s objections are OVER- RULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Frost and Schwartz’s Motions to Dismiss (ECF No. 26, 43, 46, 49, 52, 55); Defendants Abelino Reyna and McLennan County’s Motions to Dismiss (ECF No. 27, 44, 47, 50, 53, 56); Defendants City of Waco, Brent Stroman, Manuel Chavez, Robert Lanning, Jeffrey Rogers, and Patrick Swanton’s Motions to Dismiss (ECF No. 28, 45, 48, 51, 54, 57); and the City of Waco’s Supplement to its Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 76) are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART in accordance with the Report and Recommen- dation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following claims be DISMISSED in accordance with the Report and Recommendation: Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment claims against each De- fendant; Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment Malley claims against each Defendant; Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment Franks claims against Stroman, Lanning, Swanton, Rogers, Frost, and Schwartz; Plaintiffs’ conspiracy claims; Plaintiffs’ claims against the City of Waco; and Plaintiffs’ claims against the County. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Franks claims against Reyna and Chavez be DENIED in accordance with the Report and Recommenda- tion.

SIGNED this 13th day of August, 2024. ‘ (0... O\vo saevaremct ———— UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG