Deandre D. Foster v. Officer Luis Avelar

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION DEANDRE D. FOSTER, #02550541, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Case No. 6:24-cv-383-JDK-KNM § OFFICER LUIS AVELAR, § § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff Deandre Demarcus Foster, a prisoner confined within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights lawsuit complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. The case was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.

On January 21, 2026, Judge Mitchell issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 32) recommending that Defendant Avelar’s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 29) be granted to the extent that Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed, with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 488 (1994). A copy of this Report was mailed to Plaintiff at his last-known address. To date, however, neither party filed written objections.

The Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days 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 Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten days to fourteen days).

Here, the parties have not filed objections. 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. 918 (1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”).

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, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 32) as the findings of this Court.

Accordingly, it ORDERED that Defendant Avelar’s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 29) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met. All other motions which may be pending in this case are DENIED as moot.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 24th day of February, 2026.

G5, A Kom UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE