UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT August 20, 2025 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

ANTHONY JACOB SANCHEZ, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00158 § REFUGIO DISTRICT JUDGE AND § DISTRICT ATT, § § Defendant. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE On July 16, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock issued his “Order, and Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge” (D.E. 7), granting Plaintiff permission to proceed in forma pauperis and recommending that this civil rights action be construed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

and that it be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the Younger abstention doctrine.1 Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);

(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed. Instead, Plaintiff filed a letter with the Court within the deadline for objections. D.E. 14. He indicates that all criminal charges against him have been dismissed. And he shared plans for future litigation. Nothing in Plaintiff’s

1 Younger v. Harris,

(1971). description of his plans contradicts the Magistrate Judge’s assessment that the claim stated in his live pleading challenging pending criminal charges is subject to dismissal under the Younger doctrine. 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.,

(Sth Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n,

(Sth Cir. 1996)). Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 7), 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 claim challenging or seeking dismissal of pending state court criminal charges is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to the Younger doctrine or as moot. ORDERED on August 20, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2