FILED May 19, 2025 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OL TEXAS WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION py; NM DEPUTY KATHLEEN GIRAMUR, § Plaintiff, : v. : CIVIL NO. SA-22-CV-529-OLG DANIEL DRISCOLL, : Secretary of the Army, § Defendant. : ORDER The Court has considered United States Magistrate Judge Henry J. Bemporad’s Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) (Dkt. No. 59), filed on April 11, 2025, wherein Judge Bemporad recommends that the Court grant Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 52). Plaintiff filed objections (the “Objections”) (Dkt. No. 62) to the Report. When a party objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court must conduct a de novo review as to those portions of the report and recommendation to which an objection is made. See

(b)(1); FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Wilson,

(Sth Cir. 1989). Frivolous, conclusory, or general objections need not be considered by the district court. See Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n,

(Sth Cir. 1987). Any portions of the magistrate judge’s finding or recommendation that were not objected to are reviewed for clear error. Wilson,

. The Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Report subject to the Objections and is of the opinion that the Report is correct, and that the Objections are without merit as to Judge Bemporad’s ultimate findings. Accordingly, the Objections (Dkt. No. 62) are OVERRULED, the Report (Dkt. No. 59) is ACCEPTED and, for the reasons set forth therein, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 52) is GRANTED.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is CLOSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. SIGNED this AI day of May, 2025. O\R. Nin Rw ORLANDO L. GARCIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE