Midfirst Bank v. Berry et al

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 2:25-cv-00072 Document 31 Filed on 12/30/25 in TXSD Page1of2
United States District Court

Southem District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT December 30, 2025
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
MIDFIRST BANK,
Plaintiff,
V.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00072

BRANDI BERRY, et al.,

Cr Lr Lr Lr Lr Or Lr Lr

Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation
(“M&R”’). (D.E. 29). 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 v. Litton Loan
Servicing, L.P., No.4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL3823141,at*1(S.D. Tex. June 18,2015) (Harmon,
J.) (citation omitted).

Havingreviewed 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 notclearly erroneous
or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 29). Accordingly, the Court
GRANTS the parties’ Joint Motion for Entry of Second Amended Agreed Order as to the Interests

of Minors G.S. and B.S. (D.E. 28). The Court will enter the agreed order separately.

SO ORDERED.

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 2:25-cv-00072 Document 31 Filed on 12/30/25 in TXSD = Page 2 of 2

DEM

BAWTD S. MORALES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas
December 30, 2026