Opinion
Civil Action 2:23-CV-00079
08-07-2023
D'ASHAJUAN CHRISTOPHER JUSTICE Petitioner, v. BOBBY LUMPKIN, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION
DAVID S. MORALES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock's Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”). (D.E. 7). The M&R recommends that Petitioner's habeas action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b). Id. at 3.
The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge's M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Badaiki v. Schlumberger Holdings Corp., 512 F.Supp.3d 741, 743-44 (S.D. Tex. 2021) (Eskridge, J.).
Having reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 7). Accordingly, Petitioner's habeas action is DISMISSED without prejudice. (D.E. 7).
A final judgment will be entered separately.
SO ORDERED.