June 20, 2025 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

JOSEPH GORDON, § CIVIL ACTION NO Plaintiff, § 4:24-cv-04125 § § vs. § JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE § § SEAN KING, et al § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDA AND RECOMMENDATIONS Plaintiff Joseph Gordon proceeds here pro se. He brought an employment discrimination claim against Defendants in Texas state court. The matter was removed. Dkt 1. It was then referred for disposition to Magistrate Judge Dena H Palermo. Dkt 5. Plaintiff filed a motion to remand, along with a motion to dismiss two of the Defendants. Dkts 7 & 14. Pending are two Memoranda and Recommendations by Judge Palermo. Dkts 9 & 15. She recommends denying the remand motion and granting the dismissal motion. The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) &

(b)(1)(C); see also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir 1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v PPG Industries Inc,

(5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association,

(5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b) advisory committee note (1983). No party filed objections. No clear error otherwise appears upon review and consideration of the Memoranda and Recommendations, the record, and the applicable law. The Memoranda and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge are ADOPTED as the Memorandum and Order of this Court. Dkts 9 & 15. The motion by Plaintiff Joseph Gordon to remand is DENIED. Dkt 7. His motion to dismiss Defendants Sean King and Marcus DeFlavio is GRANTED. Dkt 14. SO ORDERED. Signed on June 18, 2025, at Houston, Texas.

Hon. Charles Bskridge United States District Judge