Mirasoles Produce USA, LLC v. Mena Produce, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT June 09, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk MCALLEN DIVISION MIRASOLES PRODUCE USA, LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § Civil Case No. 7:24-CV-00251 § MENA PRODUCE, LLC and § CESAR ALEJANDRO MENA GARCIA, § § Defendants. § ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pending before the Court is the May 12, 2025, Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) prepared by Magistrate Judge J. Scott Hacker. (Dkt. No. 28).

Judge Hacker made findings and conclusions and recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs, (Dkt. No. 25), be granted, (Dkt. No. 28 at 2, 10).

The Parties were provided proper notice and the opportunity to object to the M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No Party filed an objection. As a result, review is straightforward: plain error. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005). No plain error appears.

Accordingly, the Court accepts the M&R and adopts it as the opinion of the Court.

It is therefore ordered that: (1) Judge Hacker’s M&R, (Dkt. No. 28), is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs, (Dkt. No. 25), is GRANTED.

It is SO ORDERED.

Signed on June 6, 2025.

DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE