Curtis Wood v. Warden Richard Luna

□ Southern District of Texas ENTERED January 20, 2026 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION CURTIS WOOD, § § Petitioner, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00096 § WARDEN RICHARD LUNA, § § Respondent. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton’s Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”). (D.E. 17). The M&R recommends that the Court deny Petitioner’s Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment. /d. at 5.

The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, L.P., No. 4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015) (Harmon, J.) (citation omitted).

Having reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 17). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment, (D.E. 16).

1/2 SO ORDERED. i If / / / ( DAV ORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas January 2026