Hodges v. U.S. Bank as Trustee

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
ALVIN HODGES,
Plaintiff,
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
v. 	CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:25-cv-260
U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, SUCCESSOR IN
INTEREST TO BANK OF
AMERICA, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, SUCCESSOR BY
MERGER TO LASALLE BANK
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS
TRUSTEE FOR GSAMP TRUST
2007- NC1 MORTGAGE PASS
THROUGH CERTIFICATES,
SERIES 2007-NC1,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Pending 	before 	the 	Court1 	is 	Defendant 	U.S. 	Bank 	National
Association’s2 (“U.S. Bank”) Motion for Entry of Final Judgment and to
Suspend or Vacate Trial Deadlines and Trial. (ECF No. 19). Based on a review
1 This case was referred to the Undersigned for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72. (ECF No. 6).
2 Defendant is U.S. Bank National Association, Successor in Interest to Bank of
America, National Association, Successor by Merger to LaSalle Bank National Association
as Trustee for GSAMP Trust 2007-NC1 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-
NC1 [hereinafter “U.S. Bank”].
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
May 14, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-00260 Document 20 Filed 05/13/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 5

2
of the motion, record, and relevant law, the Court RECOMMENDS U.S.
Bank’s motion (id.) be GRANTED.
I. 	Background
Plaintiff Alvin Hodges (“Hodges”) filed this action in state court seeking
to challenge the validity of a home-equity lien encumbering property located
at 6423 Tiffany Drive, Houston, Texas 77085. (ECF No. 1). U.S. Bank removed
the action to this Court on January 22, 2025. (Id.).
On 	March 	5, 	2025, 	U.S. 	Bank 	moved 	to 	dismiss 	Plaintiff’s 	claims
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6). 	(ECF No. 10).
On December 4, 2025, this Court issued a Memorandum and Recommendation
recommending that U.S. Bank’s motion be granted and that Plaintiff’s quiet-
title and declaratory judgment claims be dismissed without prejudice and with
leave to amend within fourteen days of adoption of the Memorandum and
Recommendation. (ECF No. 16). No objections were filed.
On January 30, 2026, the District Judge adopted the Memorandum and
Recommendation, 	granted 	U.S. 	Bank’s 	Motion 	to 	Dismiss, 	and 	ordered
Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within fourteen days. 	(ECF No. 17).
The District Judge warned that “[f]ailure to file an Amended Complaint within
14 days will result in a dismissal of Plaintiff’s quiet title and declaratory
Case 4:25-cv-00260 Document 20 Filed 05/13/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 5

3
judgment claims with prejudice.” 	(Id.). 	Plaintiff did not file an amended
complaint by the deadline and did not seek an extension of time.
On March 12, 2026, U.S. Bank filed a Notice of Plaintiff’s Failure to
Amend and Request for Entry of Final Judgment. 	(ECF No. 18). 	Thereafter,
on May 8, 2026, U.S. Bank filed the present Motion for Entry of Final
Judgment and to Suspend or Vacate Trial Deadlines and Trial. (ECF No. 19).
The Court’s Scheduling Order has currently set Docket Call for June 5,
2026 and the Jury Trial for June 8, 2026. (ECF No. 15).
II. 	Discussion
The Court concludes that U.S. Bank’s motion (ECF No. 19) should be
granted. 	The District Judge’s January 30 Order directed Plaintiff to file an
amended complaint within fourteen days and expressly warned that failure to
do so would result in dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. 	(ECF No.
17). 	Plaintiff neither amended his pleading nor sought additional time to
comply with the Court’s Order.
When a plaintiff fails to comply with a court order or fails to prosecute
the case, dismissal may be appropriate under Rule 41(b). 	See FED. R. C IV. P.
41(b). 	“Under Rule 41(b), a district court may dismiss an action sua sponte if
the plaintiff fails to comply with court orders.” 	Nottingham v. Warden, Bill
Clements Unit, 837 F.3d 438, 440 (5th Cir. 2016).
Case 4:25-cv-00260 Document 20 Filed 05/13/26 in TXSD Page 3 of 5

4
Because Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s deadline, and because
the Court previously warned Plaintiff of the consequences of noncompliance,
dismissal with prejudice is appropriate. See F ED. R. C IV. P. 41(b); Nottingham,
837 F.3d at 441–43 (concluding district court did not abuse its discretion in
dismissing action pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with court
orders). Entry of final judgment is therefore warranted.
Moreover, there are no remaining operative claims pending before the
Court. Good cause therefore exists to vacate the remaining deadlines and trial
setting pursuant to Rule 16(b)(4) and the Court’s inherent authority to manage
its docket. FED. R. C IV. P. 16(b)(4); see also Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706
(1997) (“The District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an
incident to its power to control its own docket.”) (citations omitted).
III. 	Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, the Court RECOMMENDS U.S. Bank’s Motion
for Entry of Final Judgment and to Suspend or Vacate Trial Deadlines and
Trial (ECF No. 19) be 	GRANTED. 	Accordingly, the Court 	FURTHER
RECOMMENDS that:
1. 	All remaining pretrial deadlines in the Court’s Scheduling Order
(ECF No. 15) be VACATED;
Case 4:25-cv-00260 Document 20 Filed 05/13/26 in TXSD Page 4 of 5

5
2. 	The June 8, 2026 jury trial and related docket call settings be
VACATED;
3. 	Plaintiff 	Alvin 	Hodges’s 	quiet-title 	and 	declaratory-judgment
claims be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and
4. 	Final 	judgment 	be 	entered 	in 	favor 	of 	Defendant 	U.S. 	Bank
National Association.
The Clerk shall send copies of this Memorandum and Recommendation
to the respective parties who have fourteen days from the receipt thereof to file
written objections thereto pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)
and General Order 2002-13. Failure to file written objections within the time
period mentioned shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking the factual
findings and legal conclusions on appeal.
SIGNED in Houston, Texas on May 13, 2026.
______________________________
Richard W. Bennett
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:25-cv-00260 Document 20 Filed 05/13/26 in TXSD Page 5 of 5