Reagent Lonestar Group, LLC and Mark Daniels v. Massachusetts Mutual Life...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION REAGENT LONESTAR GROUP, LLC, § and MARK DANIELS, § § Plaintiffs, § § V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-24-CA-01094-FB § MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE § INSURANCE COMPANY, NEWREZ LLC § d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, and § LONESTAR CAPITAL HOLDINGS, LLC, § § Defendants. § ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the Court is the Amended Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, filed in the above-captioned cause on December 2, 2026. (ECF No. 27). To date, no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been received.1 Because no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finds its reasoning to be neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989).

1 Any party who desires to object to a Magistrate's findings and recommendations must serve and file his, her or its written objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 635(b)(1). If service upon a party is made by mailing a copy to the party’s last known address, “service is complete upon mailing.” FED. R. CIV. P. 5(b)(2)(C). If service is by electronic means, “service is complete upon transmission.” Id. at (E).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Amended Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 27) is ACCEPTED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) such that all claims asserted by or on behalf of Plaintiff Reagent Lonestar Group, LLC are DISMISSED and the only live, remaining claims in this case are those asserted by Plaintiff Mark Daniels in his individual capacity, to the extent he does in fact assert any such claims. This case remains referred to the Magistrate Judge for further pretrial proceedings.

It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 23rd day of January, 2026.

Feet CF D BIERY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE