IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION

KELLY BLAND, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Action No. 4:24-cv-01022-O-BP § 1ST TEXAS HEALTH § & LIFE LLC, et al., § § Defendants. §

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Before the Court is the Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice that Plaintiff and Defendant Aaron Hansome filed on September 22, 2025. ECF No. 97. The Stipulation explains that “[i]t is the intent of both parties to resolve this case, dismissing all claims by all parties from the case.” Id. at 1. It further provides that “[i]t is hereby stipulated and agreed that the above captioned action is hereby dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) of the [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure], with each party to bear its own costs.” Id. An action may be dismissed by a party without order of the court by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(ii). Entry of a judgment of dismissal with prejudice, with each party bearing the party’s own costs, would serve administrative and statistical purposes and the interest of justice. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that Chief United States District Judge Reed O’Connor DISMISS the action with prejudice, with each party bearing the party’s own costs. A copy of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation shall be served on all parties in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to any part of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation must file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with a copy. See

(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). To be specific, an objection must identify the particular finding or recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for the objection, and specify the place in the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation where the disputed determination 1s found. An objection that merely incorporates by reference or refers to the briefing before the magistrate judge is not specific. Failure to file specific written objections will bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge that are accepted or adopted by the district court, except upon grounds of plain error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

(Sth Cir. 1996) (en banc), modified by statute on other grounds,

(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections to 14 days). SIGNED on October 2, 2025.

Hal R. Ray, Jr. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE