Salinas v. Wilson

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 2:25-cv-00163 Document14 _ Filed 07/22/26 in TXSD Page1of2

United States District Court
Southem District of Texas

ENTERED
July 22, 2026
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

ROBERTO SALINAS, §

Plaintiff,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00163
ROBERT WILSON,

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock’s Memorandum and
Recommendation (““M&R”). (D.E. 10). The M&R recommends the Court dismiss Plaintiff's
claims without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. /d. at 6.

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 (Sth Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell y. Litton Loan
Servicing, L.P., No. 4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015) (Harmon,
J.) (citation omitted). ~

Having 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. 10). Accordingly, the Court
DISMISSES Plaintiffs claims without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (D.E. 1).

SO ORDERED.

1/2

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 2:25-cv-00163

Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas
July 22°52026

2/2

Document 14

Filed 07/22/26 in TXSD__— Page 2 of 2

DAVID S. MORALES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE