Opinion
Civil Action 2:20-CV-198
07-01-2021
DAVID JAMES, Petitioner, v. LORIE DAVIS, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On May 20, 2021, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 34), recommending that the Court deny “Petitioner's Response to Judge's ‘Order Adopting Memoranda and Recommendations and Affirming Denial of Jury Trial' and His Request for Reconsideration of Relief of Writ” (D.E. 33), construed as a request for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No. objections have been timely filed.
When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).
Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation (D.E. 34), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the “Petitioner's Response to Judge's ‘Order Adopting Memoranda and Recommendations and Affirming Denial of Jury Trial' and His Request for Reconsideration of Relief of Writ” (D.E. 33) is DENIED
ORDERED.