Brian Keith Lindsay v. Judge Kerry Russell, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION BRIAN KEITH LINDSAY, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Case No. 6:25-cv-124-JDK-KNM § JUDGE KERRY RUSSELL, et al., § § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Plaintiff consented to receive electronic notice.

Docket No. 8. On December 16, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket No. 28) be granted and that the claims against Defendants Bradam and Cortez be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Docket No. 30. No written 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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(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. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).

Plaintiff did not object in the prescribed period. 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, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 916 (1989) (holding that the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law” if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed).

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, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 30) is ADOPTED. The motion to dismiss (Docket No. 28) is GRANTED and the claims against Defendants Bradam and Cortez are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 11th day of January, 2026.

JHREMYD. KERN DLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE