Bonner v. Newrez LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
BERNARD E. BONNER,
Plaintiff,
versus
NEWREZ, LLC,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:24-cv-03805
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER ADOPTING
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Bernard E. Bonner proceeds here pro se. He
sued Defendant NewRez, LLC, for an injunction to prevent
Defendant from foreclosing on his property. See Dkt 1-3 at
4–6. The case was referred for disposition to Magistrate
Judge Christina A. Bryan. Dkt 7.
Prior order denied a motion by Plaintiff to remand and
granted a motion by Defendant for judgment on the
pleadings, adopting the recommendations of Judge Bryan
to this effect. Dkt 59; see also Dkts 55 & 56 (prior
Memoranda and Recommendations). Final judgment also
entered, closing this action. Dkt 60.
Pending now is a motion by Plaintiff for an extension
of time to file a notice of appeal. Dkt 61. Judge Bryan
recommends that the motion be denied for failure to prove
excusable neglect. See Dkt 66 at 3–6.
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
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
June 25, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:24-cv-03805 Document 68 Filed 06/25/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
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 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 66.
The motion by Plaintiff Bernard E. Bonner for
extension of time to file a notice of appeal is DENIED.
Dkt 61.
SO ORDERED
Signed on _______________, at Houston Texas.
___________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
June 25, 2026
Case 4:24-cv-03805 Document 68 Filed 06/25/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2