Lucas Williams v. Sergio Jiminez, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION LUCAS WILLIAMS, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:26-CV-4-RWS-JBB § SERGIO JIMINEZ, et al., § § Defendants. § ORDER The above-captioned case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge J. Boone Baxter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Docket No. 3. The February 27, 2026 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains his proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of this case, has been presented for consideration. Docket No. 6. Ultimately, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff’s case should be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Id. at 4.

On January 14, 2026, the Court ordered Plaintiff to, no later than February 13, 2026, “(1) pay the full filing fee or complete and file an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) – AO 239[;] and (2) file an amended complaint clearly establishing this Court has subject matter jurisdiction.” Docket No. 4 at 1–2, 5. Plaintiff was advised that failure to do either would result in a recommendation that Plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice. Id. at 2, 5. A copy of the January 14, 2026 Order was sent to Plaintiff at his last known address but was returned as undeliverable. Docket No. 5.

On February 27, 2026, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation, recommending that Plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice. Docket No. 6 at 4. A copy of the Report and Recommendation was sent to Plaintiff and was again returned as undeliverable.

Docket No. 7. Plaintiff has not provided the Court with an updated mailing address or otherwise contacted the Court since the filing of his complaint on January 9, 2026. Docket No. 1.

Additionally, no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed to date.

Because no objections have been received, Plaintiff is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. Duarte v. City of Lewisville, 858 F.3d 348, 352 (Sth Cir. 2017); Arriaga v. Laxminarayan, No. 4:21-CV-00203-RAS, 2021 WL 3287683, at *1 (E.D.

Tex. July 31, 2021). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this 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, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (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. 6) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 18th day of March, 2026.

[Dohert LU Llpectsr G2.

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2