Roberts v. Lozada et al, No. 5:2021cv00170 - Document 16 (N.D. Tex. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE. The District Court made an independent examination of the record in this case and reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report for plain error. Finding no ne, the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate. It is therefore ordered that Plaintiffs motion for restraining order (Dkt. No. 11) is denied.This case will remain on the docket of the United States Magistrate Judge forcompletion of judicial screening, as described in the order of transfer dated August 23, 2021. re: 13 Findings and Recommendations (Ordered by Judge James Wesley Hendrix on 12/16/2021) (lkw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Roberts v. Lozada et al Doc. 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUBBOCKDIVISION RENO PRESTON ROBERTS, Institutional ID No. 2029343 Plaintiff, No. 5:21-CV-00170-BQ ANDREA LOZADA, etal., Defendants. ORDER ACCEPTING FI}IDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF TIIE UMTED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation that the Court deny Plaintiffs motion for restraining order. No objections were filed. The District Court made an independent examination of the record in this case and reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate. It is therefore ordered that Plaintiffs motion for restlaining order (Dkt. No. 11) is denied. This case will remain on the docket of the united states Magistrate Judge for complerion ofjudicial screening, as described in the order oftransfer dated August 23'2021. (Dkt. No. 6.) Dated December k, 2021. JAME6 WESLEY HENDRIX Uni#d States District Judge Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
