Opinion
Civil Action 2:22-CV-00275
01-18-2023
JOSEPH A. STANFORD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BILL GATES, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION
DAVID S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby's Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”). (D.E. 11). The M&R recommends that the Court DISMISS Plaintiff Joseph A. Stanford's case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failing to comply with court order. Id. at 1,2.
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); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015). Having carefully 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. 11). The Court DISMISSES Plaintiffs' case pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with court order. A final judgment shall be entered separately.
The same day the M&R was filed, Plaintiff Joseph Stanford filed a letter regarding his case. See (D.E. 12). However, the letter was largely illegible and the portions that were legible did not reference the M&R. As such, this letter cannot be construed as an objection to the M&R.
SO ORDERED. .