William v. Collins et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
LA PRENDIA DANIELLE
WILLIAM,
Plaintiff,
versus
PATRICIA S. COLLINS and
BUREAU OF ENGRAVING
AND PRINTING,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:25-cv-05277
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff La Prendia Danielle William proceeds here
pro se. She sued Defendants Patricia Solimene (formerly
Collins) and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing in state
court. See Dkt 1-2 (original petition). Defendants removed.
Dkt 1. The matter was referred for disposition to
Magistrate Judge Dena Hanovice Palermo. Dkt 6.
Defendants moved for more definite statement,
alleging that Plaintiff’s handwritten petition is illegible
and contains incorrect contact information. See Dkt 5.
Judge Palermo granted the motion and ordered Plaintiff to
file a typed complaint with correct contact information by
December 12, 2025. Dkt 8. Plaintiff failed to do so. Judge
Palermo then entered a Report and Recommendation
recommending that this action be dismissed with prejudice
given failure to comply with prior order. Dkt 13.
The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of
a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically
objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see
also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
March 27, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-05277 Document 17 Filed 03/27/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other
portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no
clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v
PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing
Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d
1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b)
advisory committee note (1983).
No party filed objections. No clear error appears upon
review of the Report and Recommendation, the record, and
the applicable law.
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and Order of this
Court. Dkt 13.
This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
A final judgment will enter separately.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on March 27, 2026, at Houston, Texas.
___________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
Case 4:25-cv-05277 Document 17 Filed 03/27/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2