Sandoval v. United States

District Court, E.D. Texas

Sandoval v. United States

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

PABLO ANTONIO SANDOVAL, § § Petitioner, § § v. § § Case No. 6:24-cv-127-JDK-JDL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, § § Respondent. §

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the Court is Movant Pablo Antonio Sandoval’s motion to dismiss. Docket No. 15. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

. On July 18, 2025, Judge Love issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that Movant’s motion to dismiss be granted and that the case be dismissed without prejudice. Docket No. 16. No timely objections were filed. This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and Recommendation.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

79 F.3d 1415, 1430

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute,

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days). Here, no party objected within the prescribed period. The Court therefore reviews Judge Love’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews his legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson,

864 F.2d 1219, 1221

(5th Cir. 1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law’). Having reviewed Judge Love’s Report and the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 16) as the opinion of this Court. Movant’s claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. Further, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 23rd day of August, 2025. J Korb JHREMYD. KERN DLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown