Bolden v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
DEIETRA BOLDEN,
Plaintiff,
versus
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:25-cv-03161
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER ADOPTING
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Deietra Bolden sues the Department of
Housing and Urban Development. She filed a complaint
bringing claims for wrongful foreclosure, fraudulent
inducement, negligent misrepresentation, quiet title,
breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, and for
declaratory and injunctive relief. Dkt 1 at ¶¶5.1–5.4, 8.1–
13.4. She also asserts violations of 12 USC §2605(e) and
the APA. Dkt 1 at ¶¶6.1–7.4.
Plaintiff applied to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt 3.
The matter was referred for disposition to Magistrate
Judge Richard Bennett. Dkt 8. He entered a Memorandum
and Recommendation recommending that the application
to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. Dkt 9. He noted
that the application indicates Plaintiff is presently
employed, fails to list the value of all assets as requested,
and doesn’t indicate Plaintiff has any dependents or any
debts or financial obligations. Id at 2.
The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of
a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
December 08, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-03161 Document 12 Filed 12/08/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see
also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir
1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other
portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no
clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v
PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing
Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d
1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b)
advisory committee note (1983).
No party filed objections. No clear error appears upon
review and consideration of the Memorandum and
Recommendation, the record, and the applicable law.
The Memorandum and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and
Order of this Court. Dkt 9.
The application by Plaintiff Deietra Bolden to proceed
in forma pauperis is DENIED. Dkt 3.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on _______________, at Houston, Texas.
___________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
December 08, 2025
Case 4:25-cv-03161 Document 12 Filed 12/08/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 2