December 10, 2025 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

JOHNTREL LEWIS, § CIVIL ACTION NUMBER Plaintiff, § 4:25-cv-03172 § § versus § JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE § § FAIR COLLECTIONS & § OUTSOURCING, INC, § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM, RECOMMENDATION & ORDER Plaintiff Johntrel Lewis proceeds here pro se. He filed a motion for preliminary injunction. Dkt 14. This action was referred to Magistrate Judge Richard W. Bennett. Pending is a Memorandum, Recommendation, and Order stating that the motion for preliminary injunction should be denied because “Plaintiff’s requested relief—enjoining Defendant from reporting the subject account as ‘disputed’—is now moot, as Defendant has deleted the tradeline from Plaintiff’s credit report.” See Dkt 23 at 4. The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) &

(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,

(5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association,

(5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b) advisory committee note (1983). None of the parties filed objections. No clear error otherwise appears upon review and consideration of the Memorandum, Recommendation, and Order, the record, and the applicable law. The Memorandum, Recommendation, and Order of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and Order of this Court. Dkt 23. The motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED AS MOOT. Dkt 14. SO ORDERED. Signed on December 5, 2025, at Houston, Texas.

5 Z. Honorable Charles Egkridge United States District Judge