Fulmer-Stewart v. United States Department of Justice

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION TAMARA KAY FULMER-STEWART, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-25-cv-00414-FB § UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF § JUSTICE, and ATTORNEY GENERAL § DOJ PAMELA BONDI, § § Defendants. § ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge concerning Tamara Kay Fulmer-Stewart’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs and Complaint, filed on August 4, 2025. (Docket no. 13). To date, no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been received.1 Because no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finds its reasoning to be neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989).

1 Any party who desires to object to a Magistrate's findings and recommendations must serve and file his, her or its written objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 635(b)(1). If service upon a party is made by mailing a copy to the party’s last known address, “service is complete upon mailing.” FED. R. CIV. P. 5(b)(2)(C). If service is by electronic means, “service is complete upon transmission.” Id. at (E).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (docket no. 13) is ACCEPTED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) such that this case is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders, and for failure to state a non-frivolous claim. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

ITIS FINALLY ORDERED that motions pending with the Court, ifany, are Dismissed as Moot and this case is CLOSED.

It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 29th day of August, 2025.

ns ; D BIERY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE