Garza v. Lubbock County Detention Center et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
I,UBBOCK DIVISION
ALBERT GARZA, JR.,
Institutional ID No. 02482709
Plaintiff,
No. 5:24-CV-00009-H
LUBBOCK COUNTY DETENTION
CENTER, et a/.,
Defendants
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECO ATION OF THE I-INITE D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a
recommendation (FCR) in this case. The Court adopted the FCR after Plaintiff failed to
timely file objections. Dkt. No. 21. However, the Court later granted Plaintiff leave to file
late objections and reopened the case, Dkt. No. 24, and Plaintiff subsequendy filed his
objections. Dkt. No. 25.
"The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's
disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72@)(3); see 28 U.S.C.
! 636OX1). In contrast, the district judge reviews any unobjected+o findings, conclusions,
and recommendations for plain error. The Court has examined the record and reviewed the
unobjected-to portions ofthe FCR for plain error and, finding none, expressly accepts and
adopts those portions of the Magistrate Judge's findings, conclusions, and recommendation.
Additionally, in light of Plaintiffs specific objections, the Court has conducted a de
novo review of the relevant portions of the FCR and the record in this case. Many of
Plaintiffs objections are either restatements of arguments made in his complaint and
Case 5:24-cv-00009-H Document 27 Filed 01/08/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID <pageID>

questionnaie responses, arguments thoroughly addressed by the FCR, mere disagreements
with the Magistrate Judge's wording, or conclusory statements insisting that his claims have
merit. However, Plaintiffs objections do not overcome the conclusions as to his claims
contained in the FCR.
In short, the FCR conectly concludes that Plaintiffhas failed to state a claim. Thus,
the Court overrules Plaintiffs objections and accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions,
and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.
The Court therefore orders that Plaintiffs complaint and all claims alleged within it
are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. $0 1915, 1915A.
All reliefnot expressly granted and any pending motions are denied.
The Court will enter judgment accordingly.
So ordered.
Daredlanuary 6 ,2026
JAMES SLEY HENDRIX
Unit tates District Judge
2
Case 5:24-cv-00009-H Document 27 Filed 01/08/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID <pageID>