FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 29, 2025 WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION ay. NM MATTHEW ANDREW GARCES, § □□□□□□ Plaintiff, : v. : NO. SA-25-CV-00702-OLG TAYLOR CAUDILL and AMANDA : AVILA, § Defendants. : ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Court has considered United States Magistrate Judge Richard B. Farrer’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), filed September 2, 2025, concerning pro se Plaintiff Matthew Andrew Garces’s proposed complaint. See R&R, Dkt. No. 10. A party who wishes to object to a Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations must serve and file specific written objections within 14 days. FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the R&R was mailed by certified mail on September 3, 2025 (see Dkt. No. 12) and received on September 6, 2025 (see Dkt. No. 13). Plaintiff’s objections, filed October 5, 2025, are therefore untimely. See Dkt. No. 14. When a party objects to an R&R, the Court must make a de novo determination as to “any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” FED. R. □□□□ P. 72(b)(3); see United States. v. Wilson,

(Sth Cir. 1989), cert. denied,

(1989). Objections must be specific; frivolous, conclusory, or general objections need not be considered by the district court. Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n,

(Sth Cir. 1987) (emphasis added) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright,

, 410 n.8 (Sth Cir. 1982), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. U.S. Auto. Ass’n,

(Sth Cir. 1996)). Any

portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings or recommendations that were not objected to are reviewed for clear error. Wilson,

. Because Plaintiff failed to timely object, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear errors and finds none. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Farrer’s R&R (Dkt. No. 10) and, for the reasons set forth therein, this case is DISMISSED pursuant to

(e) as frivolous and for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. ! This case is CLOSED. It isso ORDERED.

SIGNED this__ \ day of October 2025. Clery ORLANDO L. GARCIA United States District Judge

‘Judge Farrer additionally recommended that Plaintiff be designated a vexatious litigant and subject to a pre-filing injunction in the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division. Dkt. No. 10 at 6. Because Garces has since been designated as such by Judge Pulliam and, thus, is already subject to a pre-filing injunction, see Garces v. Rossbach, No. SA-25-CV-00441-JKP,

(W.D. Tex. Sept. 4, 2025), that portion of the R&R is moot.

ry