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

KEDRIEN BOOKER, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-CV-43-RWS-JBB § CAROLE EHLER, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER Plaintiff Kedrien Booker, an inmate currently confined in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit. Docket No. 1. Plaintiff complains of alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights during his confinement in the Bowie County Correctional Center. Id. at 3–4. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge J. Boone Baxter in accordance with

. On October 30, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation, recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction (Docket No. 5) be denied. Docket No. 12 at 4. Plaintiff received a copy of the Report and Recommendation on November 5, 2025, but filed no objections. See Docket No. 14. Because no objections have been received, Plaintiff is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations. Arriaga v. Laxminarayan, No. 4:21-CV-00203-RAS,

, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2021). Moreover, except upon grounds of plain error, an aggrieved party is barred from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. See id.; Duarte v. City of Lewisville,

(5th Cir. 2017). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in the above-captioned case and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson,

(Sth Cir. 1989) (where no objections to a magistrate judge’s report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 12) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 12th day of December, 2025.

[Doher t LU Lbrpectsr G2. ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2