Villasana v. Rivera et al

1 / 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
AUDENCIO G. VILLASANA, III,
Plaintiff,
VS.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00146
OSCAR RIVERA, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On October 17, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock issued his
“Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge” (D.E. 72),
recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to comply with court orders. The
parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s
memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General
Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed.
When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and
recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error
on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and
recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing
Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).
Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the
Magistrate Judge’s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 72), and all other relevant
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
November 19, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 2:24-cv-00146 Document 75 Filed 11/19/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2 / 2
documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the
findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
ORDERED on November 19, 2025.
_______________________________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:24-cv-00146 Document 75 Filed 11/19/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 2