Snellings v. United States Of America et al

2:26-cv-00029TxsdApr 7, 2026

Full text

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
April 07, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 2:26-cv-00029 Document 20 Filed 04/07/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2
Case 2:26-cv-00029 Document 20 Filed 04/07/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 2:26-cv-00029 Document 20 Filed 04/07/26 in TXSD Page1of2

United States District Court
Southem District of Texas

ENTERED
April 07, 2026

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
SIDNEY RAY SNELLINGS,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:26-CV-0029

Vv.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

COD LOD COR LOR COD COD 602 COD COD

Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation
(“M&R”). (D.E. 14). The M&R recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff's motion to proceed
IFP, dismiss his complaint without prejudice, deny as moot his motion for preliminary injunction,
and send notice of this dismissal to the Manager of the Three Strikes List for the Southern District
of Texas. /d. at 5.

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 vy. Litton Loan
Servicing, L.P., No. 4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *I (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. 14). Accordingly, the Court

[/2

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO.

Case 2:26-cv-00029 Document 20 Filed 04/07/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2

DENIES Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP, (D.E. 3), DISMISSES his complaint without
prejudice, and DENIES as moot his motion for preliminary injunction, (D.E. 2). The Court
ORDERS the Clerk of Court to send notice of this dismissal to the Manager of the Three Strikes

List for the Southern District of Texas at Three_Strikes@txs.uscourts.gov. The Court will enter

final judgment separately.
SO ORDERED. \

DAVID'SXVI ORALES
UNITED ORS DISTRICT JUDGE

Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas

April 2% 2026

zd 2

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.