Lopez v. Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., et al

1 / 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
CONSUELO LOPEZ,
Plaintiff,
VS.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00018
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
On December 19, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued
her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 28), recommending that the Court grant
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (D.E. 23). 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. 28), and all other relevant
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
February 02, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 2:25-cv-00018 Document 29 Filed 02/02/26 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, Defendants’ motion for
summary judgment (D.E. 23) is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
ORDERED on February 2, 2026.
_______________________________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:25-cv-00018 Document 29 Filed 02/02/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2