From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arredondo v. Torres

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Oct 23, 2014
No. 3:14-CV-1934-P (N.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2014)

Opinion

No. 3:14-CV-1934-P

10-23-2014

FRANCES GONZALES ARREDONDO, Plaintiff, v. CRUZ SYLVA TORRES, JR., Defendant.


ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On September 8, 2014, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation ("FCR") in which he recommended that the Court summarily dismiss Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff has filed no specific objection to the FCR. But on October 10, 2014, Plaintiff filed a document that has been docketed as "Correspondence." He therein provides various records.

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the issued FCR and the subsequent filing of Plaintiff, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), the Court finds that the FCR is correct. Because Plaintiff has asserted no specific objection to the FCR and the Court cannot reasonably construe the subsequent filing of Plaintiff as stating any specific objection, the Court has reviewed the FCR for clear error and is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. The Court hereby accepts the FCR as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. And it summarily DISMISSES this action with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

SO ORDERED this 23rd day of October, 2014.

/s/_________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Arredondo v. Torres

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Oct 23, 2014
No. 3:14-CV-1934-P (N.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2014)
Case details for

Arredondo v. Torres

Case Details

Full title:FRANCES GONZALES ARREDONDO, Plaintiff, v. CRUZ SYLVA TORRES, JR.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Date published: Oct 23, 2014

Citations

No. 3:14-CV-1934-P (N.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2014)

Citing Cases

Pickett v. Tex. Tech. Univ. Health Scis. Ctr.

Finally, an objection that merely re-argues a “position already analyzed and rejected in the FCR[]” has not…

Brooks v. Alcon

P. 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), so the Court analyzes the FCRs for clear error. See Arredondo v. Torres,…