Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-464
12-18-2017
BRANDON RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, v. BRAD LIVINGSTON, et al, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On November 30, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington issued her "Memorandum and Recommendation to Deny Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment" (D.E. 131). 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 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. 131), 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 Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. 117) is DENIED.
ORDERED this 18th day of December, 2017.
/s/_________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE