Booker v. Ehler et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
KEDRIEN BOOKER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLE EHLER, et al.,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-CV-43-RWS-JBB
ORDER
Plaintiff Kedrien Booker, an inmate currently confined in the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights
lawsuit. Docket No. 1. Plaintiff complains of alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights
during his confinement in the Bowie County Correctional Center. Id. at 3–4. The case was referred
to United States Magistrate Judge J. Boone Baxter in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636.
On October 30, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation,
recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction
(Docket No. 5) be denied. Docket No. 12 at 4. Plaintiff received a copy of the Report and
Recommendation on November 5, 2025, but filed no objections. See Docket No. 14. Because no
objections have been received, Plaintiff is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of the
Magistrate 	Judge’s 	proposed 	findings, 	conclusions 	and 	recommendations. 	Arriaga 	v.
Laxminarayan, No. 4:21-CV-00203-RAS, 2021 WL 3287683, at *1 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2021).
Moreover, except upon grounds of plain error, an aggrieved party is barred from appellate review
of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District
Court. See id.; Duarte v. City of Lewisville, 858 F.3d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 2017).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in the above-captioned case and the Report and
Case 5:25-cv-00043-RWS-JBB Document 16 Filed 12/12/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

Page 2 of 2
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the
Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864
F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (where no objections to a magistrate judge’s report are filed, the
standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). Accordingly,
it is
ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 12)
is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary
injunction (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.
.
____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 12th day of December, 2025.
Case 5:25-cv-00043-RWS-JBB Document 16 Filed 12/12/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>