UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:24-cv-00272 Liberty Hartman et al., Plaintiffs, V. The United States of America et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiffs filed this medical-malpractice action asserting a Fed- eral Tort Claims Act claim and state-law claims. Doc. 1. The par- ties filed a notice of settlement and requested a settlement hearing because this case involves a minor child, S.P.H. Docs. 62, 65. The court referred the settlement to a magistrate judge pursuant to

(b). Doc. 66. On July 7, 2025, the magistrate judge issued a report and rec- ommendation that the court 1) find the settlements on behalf of the minor, S.P.H., to be fair, just, and in his best interests; 2) ap- prove the settlement agreements; 3) enter a partial final judg- ment; 4) approve the guardian ad litem’s fee of $9,000 plus an additional $2,500 for the drafting of the special needs trust docu- ments; and 5) enter a decree establishing the S.P.H. Supplemental Needs Trust. Doc. 81. None of the parties filed written objections and the time for doing so has passed. When a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s report, the court reviews the record only for clear error. See Douglass ». United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996). Hav- ing reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. The court finds that each settlement agreement is fair, just, and in the best interests of the minor, S.P.H. Orders entering partial final judgment, approving the settlements and

guardian ad litem fee, and establishing the special-needs trust will be entered separately. So ordered by the court on July 31, 2025. fabod BARKER United States District Judge

_2-