UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT January 15, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

JESUS SOLIZ, § § Petitioner, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00073 § BOBBY LUMPKIN, § § Respondent. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE On December 13, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock issued his “Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge” (D.E. 30). The Memorandum and Recommendation recommends that all pending motions be denied, this action be dismissed, and no certificate of appealability be issued because this habeas corpus action is moot, due to Petitioner’s release from custody. The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);

(b)(1); General Order No. 2002- 13. 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.,

(5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n,

(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. 30), 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, the Court

e DISMISSES Petitioner’s habeas petition (D.E. 8) without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as moot; e DENIES as moot Petitioner’s pending motions for judicial notice and permission to file a § 1983 action (D.E. 17), for a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order (D.E. 21), to proceed in forma pauperis on the motion for preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order (D.E. 22), to stay this action (D.E. 24), for leave to file supplemental grounds for relief (D.E. 25), and for extension of time to respond to Respondent’s motion for summary judgment (D.E. 26, 28); e DENIES as moot Respondent’s motion for summary judgment (D.E. 20); and

e In the event that Petitioner requests a certificate of appealability, that request is DENIED. ORDERED on January 15, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2