Russell Hess; Barbara Wofford; and K.H., H.H., B.H., L.H., R.H., Minor...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION RUSSELL HESS; BARBARA WOFFORD; § and K.H., H.H., B.H., L.H., R.H., Minor § Daughters, § § Plaintiffs, § § V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-25-CV-00814-FB § OFFICER LIAM ORTMAN, Badge #1122; § OFFICER ARON BENOY, Badge #1105; § SERGEANT BRYAN HARSHMAN, Badge § #1116; THE BULVERDE POLICE § DEPARTMENT; and THE CITY OF § BULVERDE, § § Defendants. § ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the Court are the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 18) recommending that Defendants’ First Amended Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) be granted, along with Plaintiffs’ written objections (ECF Nos. 21 & 22) thereto.

Where no party has objected to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation. 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."). In such cases, the Court need only review the Report and Recommendation and determine whether it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989).

On the other hand, any Report and Recommendation to which objection is made requires de novo review by the Court. Such a review means that the Court will examine the entire record, and will make an independent assessment of the law. The Court need not, however, conduct a de novo review when the objections are frivolous, conclusive, or general in nature. Battle v. United States Parole Comm'n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987).

The Court has thoroughly analyzed Plaintiffs’ submissions in light of the entire record. As required by Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), the Court has conducted an independent review of the entire record in this cause and has conducted a de novo review with respect to those matters raised by the objections. After due consideration, and for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, the Court concludes the objections lack merit.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 18) is ACCEPTED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) such that Defendants The City of Bulverde, Bulverde Police Department, Sgt. Bryan Harshman, Officer Aron Benoy and Officer Liam Ortman’s First Amended Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above styled and numbered cause is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that remaining motions pending with the Court, if any, are Dismissed as Moot and this case is CLOSED.

It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 28th day of January, 2026.

Feet CF D BIERY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -2-