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

WHIS BENJAMIN GRANT, SR., § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Case No. 4:25-cv-482-JDK-KNM § ERICSSON SMART FACTORY INC § USA 5G SMART FACTORY BNEW § GSU NPAM USA, § § Defendant. §

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff Whis Benjamin Grant, Sr., proceeding pro se, filed this lawsuit against Defendant Ericsson Smart Factory Inc USA 5G Smart Factory BNEW GSU NPAM USA on May 6, 2025. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell in accordance with

. The Court entered a show cause order on October 2, 2025, directing Plaintiff to show cause within ten days of entry of the Order why the lawsuit should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to timely effect service. Docket No. 6. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a response. On October 16, 2025, Judge Mitchell issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Docket No. 7. No objections have been 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.

(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. Assn,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute,

(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days). Here, Plaintiff did not file any objections. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson,

(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 the Magistrate Judge’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. 7) as the findings of this Court. It is therefore ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute. FED. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Any pending motions are DENIED as moot. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 6th day of November, 2025. ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE