Deietra Bolden v. Department of Housing and Urban Development

December 08, 2025 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION DEIETRA BOLDEN, § CIVIL ACTION NUMBER Plaintiff, § 4:25-cv-03161 § § versus § JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE § § DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING § AND URBAN § DEVELOPMENT, § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Deietra Bolden sues the Department of Housing and Urban Development. She filed a complaint bringing claims for wrongful foreclosure, fraudulent inducement, negligent misrepresentation, quiet title, breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, and for declaratory and injunctive relief. Dkt 1 at ¶¶5.1–5.4, 8.1– 13.4. She also asserts violations of 12 USC §2605(e) and the APA. Dkt 1 at ¶¶6.1–7.4.

Plaintiff applied to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt 3.

The matter was referred for disposition to Magistrate Judge Richard Bennett. Dkt 8. He entered a Memorandum and Recommendation recommending that the application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. Dkt 9. He noted that the application indicates Plaintiff is presently employed, fails to list the value of all assets as requested, and doesn’t indicate Plaintiff has any dependents or any debts or financial obligations. Id at 2.

The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir 1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b) advisory committee note (1983).

No party filed objections. No clear error appears upon review and consideration of the Memorandum and Recommendation, the record, and the applicable law.

The Memorandum and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and Order of this Court. Dkt 9.

The application by Plaintiff Deietra Bolden to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Dkt 3.

SO ORDERED.

Signed on December 08.2025 at Houston, Texas.

Honorable Charles ehetase United States District Judge