San Miguel v. Searcy et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUBBOCK DIVISION
SAMUEL SAN MIGUEL,
Institutional ID No. 05687217,
Plaintiff,
v. No. 5:25-CV-00033-H-BV
MICHAEL SEARCY, er al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a
recommendation that the Court deny Plaintiff's motion seeking injunctive relief. Plaintiff
filed objections.
“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(a)(3); see 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1). In contrast, the district judge reviews any unobjected-to findings, conclusions,
and recommendations for plain error. The District Court independently examined the
record and unobjected-to portions of the FCR for plain error. Additionally, the Court has
conducted a de novo review of Plaintiff's brief objections—which amount to restatements of
arguments made in his prior pleadings, conclusory statements, or mere disagreements with
the wording of the FCR. The Court finds no error, overrules the objections, and accepts
and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge.
Case 5:25-cv-00033-H-BV Document 31 Filed 01/12/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID <pageID>

As a result, Plaintiffs motion, Dkt. No. 16, is denied.
This case is returned to the docket of the Honorable Amanda ‘Amy’ R. Burch to
continue the judicial screening process under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2). See Dkt. No. 10.
So ordered.
Dated January ie. 2026. ohlee
JAMES WESLEY HENDRIX
United States District Judge
Case 5:25-cv-00033-H-BV Document 31 Filed 01/12/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID <pageID>