Kohlheim v. Curtis et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
DEBRA KOHLHEIM and
LAWONNE ELEANORA-
WELLS,
Plaintiffs,
versus
BRENDA CURTIS, et al,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:26-cv-02042
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER ADOPTING
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiffs Debra Kohlheim and Lawonne Eleanora-
Wells proceed here pro se. They bring claims against
Defendants Brenda Curtis, Lytia Williams, Sherry
Tsigounis, Viola Epps, Stephanie Wheeler, Lamont Bruce,
and the Maryland State Department of Education, Office
of Child Care, for negligence, defamation, and fraud
related to the alleged denial of a contract. See Dkts 1-3 at
10–13 (original petition), 193–94 (amended petition). After
removing this action to federal court, Defendants jointly
moved to dismiss all claims for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Dkt 4.
The matter was referred for disposition to Magistrate
Judge Christina A. Bryan. Dkt 11. She issued a
Memorandum and Recommendation recommending that
the motion be granted because Plaintiffs did not carry their
burden of demonstrating Defendants have contacts with
Texas sufficient to satisfy general or specific jurisdiction.
Dkt 12 at 5–6. She also recommends that request by
Plaintiffs to remand this action be denied because diversity
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
May 15, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:26-cv-02042 Document 13 Filed 05/15/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
jurisdiction was properly established and removal was
timely. Id at 6–7.
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
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).
None of the parties filed objections. No clear error
otherwise appears upon review and consideration of the
Memorandum and Recommendation, the record, and the
applicable law.
The Memorandum and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and
Order of this Court. Dkt 12.
The request by Plaintiffs Debra Kohlheim and
Lawonne Eleanora-Wells to remand is DENIED. Dkt 9.
The motion by Defendants Brenda Curtis, Lytia
Williams, Sherry Tsigounis, Viola Epps, Stephanie
Wheeler, Lamont Bruce, and the Maryland State
Department of Education, Office of Child Care, to dismiss
for lack of personal jurisdiction is GRANTED. Dkt 4.
This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
A final judgment will issue by separate order.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on May 15, 2026, at Houston, Texas.
___________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
Case 4:26-cv-02042 Document 13 Filed 05/15/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2