Christopher Brandt v. Mullin

Case: 25-50973 Document: 26-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 25-50973 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ May 5, 2026 Lyle W. Cayce Christopher Brandt, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Defendant—Appellee. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:25-CV-1352 ______________________________ Before Davis, Wilson, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * After his discharge from the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Plaintiff-Appellant Christopher Brandt sued pro se and sought pauper status. That request was referred to a

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 25-50973 Document: 26-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2026

No. 25-50973 magistrate judge in accordance with the district court’s Standing Order. 1 After granting Brandt pauper status, the magistrate judge screened his complaint and recommended dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 2 The report and recommendation (R&R) advises Brandt of his right to object to the R&R within 14 days per 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and federal Rule 72(b). 3 Ten days later, Brandt filed a “Notice of Appeal and Objection to Magistrate Judge’s Order” (Notice). The Notice contains specific objections to the R&R and urges the district judge to let Brandt prosecute his case.

Brandt’s Notice was construed as a notice of appeal to this court. But based on the substance of the filing, we conclude the Notice is better understood to be objections to the R&R for the district judge to decide. We therefore DISMISS the appeal and REMAND the case to the district court with instructions to construe Brandt’s Notice as objections to the R&R. We express no opinion on the merits.

_____________________ See Standing Order Regarding In Forma Pauperis Case Management (W.D. Tex. Oct. 8, 2019).

A district court “shall dismiss” an in forma pauperis complaint if the suit is “frivolous or malicious;” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)–(iii).

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).