Opinion
Civil Action 4:20-cv-03119
07-08-2022
MARY ANN ESHELMAN and REGINALD CLARK, Plaintiffs, v. MPFP LLC, et al, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Hon. Charles Eskridge United States District Judge.
Pending is a Memorandum and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan dated June 22, 2022. Dkt 53. No party objected.
The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see also United States v Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir 1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other portions to which there's no objection if satisfied that no clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v PPG Industries Inc, 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b) advisory committee note (1983).
No clear error appears upon review and consideration of the Memorandum and Recommendation, the record, and the applicable law.
The Memorandum and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and Order of this Court. Dkt 23.
The motion by Plaintiffs Mary Ann Eshelman and Reginald Clark for certification of a collective action and tolling of the statute of limitations in that regard is DENIED. Dkt 38.
SO ORDERED.