Sean McNamara v. Officer Ortega, Badge #6120, Natalia Police Department, City...

FILED January 09, 2026 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION BY: NM DEPUTY SEAN MCNAMARA, § § Plaintiff, § § . v. § § NO. SA-25-CV-1577-OLG OFFICER ORTEGA, Badge #6120, § Natalia Police Department, CITY OF § NATALIA, TEXAS, NATALIA § POLICE DEPARTMENT, § § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Court has considered United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), filed December 8, 2025, concerning Plaintiff's proposed complaint (See R&R, Dkt. No. 6.)

A party who wishes to object to a Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations must serve and file specific written objections within 14 days. FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the _ R&R was mailed by certified mail on December 8, 2025 (see Dkt. No. 8) and received on December 11, 2025 (see Dkt. No. 11). Plaintiff timely filed her objections (Dkt. No. 13)—along with a separate Motion for De Novo Review (Dkt. No. 12)—on December 16, 2025.

When a party objects to an R&R, the Court must make a de novo determination as to “any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” FED. R. Clv.

P. 72(b)(3); see United States. v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989). Objections must be specific; frivolous, conclusory, or general objections need not be considered by the district court. Batile v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (Sth Cir. 1987) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (Sth Cir. 1982), overruled on other grounds by Douglass y. U.S. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (Sth Cir. 1996)). Any portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings or recommendations that were not objected to are reviewed for clear error. Wilson, 864 F.2d at 1221.

The Court has reviewed the recommendation de novo and finds that Plaintiffs objections should be and hereby are OVERRULED. The Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s R&R (Dkt.

No. 6) and, for the reasons set forth therein, Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

All other pending motions are DISMISSED AS MOOT.

This case is CLOSED.

It isso ORDERED.

SIGNED this PP aay of January 2026.

ORLANDO L. GARCIA United States District Judge