Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 7:19-CV-00144
04-13-2020
HAROLD VINCENT AUZENNE, v. LORIE DAVIS, Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is Petitioner Harold Vincent Auzenne's petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which had been referred to the Magistrate Court for a report and recommendation. On February 28, 2020, the Magistrate Court issued the Report and Recommendation, recommending that Respondent's motion for summary judgment be DENIED as moot, that the § 2254 petition be DENIED as moot, and that this civil action be DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. It was further recommended that a Certificate of Appealability be DENIED. The time for filing objections has passed and no objections have been filed.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Respondent's motion for summary judgment is DENIED as moot, the § 2254 petition is DENIED as moot, and this civil action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. Finally, a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED.
As noted by the Fifth Circuit, "[t]he advisory committee's note to Rule 72(b) states that, '[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the [district] court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.' " Douglas v. United States Service Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 145, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note (1983)) superceded by statute on other grounds by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), as stated in ACS Recovery Servs., Inc. v. Griffin, No. 11-40446, 2012 WL 1071216, at *7 n. 5 (5th Cir. April 2, 2012). --------
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DONE at McAllen, Texas, this 13th day of April, 2020.
/s/_________
Micaela Alvarez
United States District Judge