2:26-cv-00029•Snellings v. United States Of America et al
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
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.