Sena v. O'Malley DO NOT DOCKET IN THIS CASE. CASE HAS BEEN REMANDED.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT June 02, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

JOE F. SENA, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00227 § MARTIN J. O'MALLEY, § § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION On May 7, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 15), recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for attorney’s fees and expenses (D.E. 14). 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); 28 U.S.C. § 636(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., 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. 15), 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, Plaintiff's motion for attorney’s fees and expenses (D.E. 14) is GRANTED and the Court ORDERS that an EAJA fee award of $7,446.60 be made payable to Plaintiff, Joe F. Sena, and sent in care of his attorney, David F. Chermol.

ORDERED on May 30, 2025.

GONZAIGS RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2/2