Garza v. Lubbock County Detention Center
5:24-cv-00009
N.D. Tex.
Jan 8, 2026
Check Treatment
Docket
Case 5:24-cv-00009-H Document 27 Filed 01/08/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID 80 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS I,UBBOCK DIVISION ALBERT GARZA, JR., Institutional ID No. 02482709 Plaintiff, No. 5:24-CV-00009-H LUBBOCK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, et a/., Defendants ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECO ATION OF THE I-INITE D STATES MAGISTRA TE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation (FCR) in this case. The Court adopted the FCR after Plaintiff failed to timely file objections. Dkt. No. 21. However, the Court later granted Plaintiff leave to file late objections and reopened the case, Dkt. No. 24, and Plaintiff subsequendy filed his objections. Dkt. No. 25. "The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72@)(3); see 28 U.S.C. ! 636OX1). In contrast, the district judge reviews any unobjected+o findings, conclusions, and recommendations for plain error. The Court has examined the record and reviewed the unobjected-to portions ofthe FCR for plain error and, finding none, expressly accepts and adopts those portions of the Magistrate Judge's findings, conclusions, and recommendation. Additionally, in light of Plaintiffs specific objections, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the relevant portions of the FCR and the record in this case. Many of Plaintiffs objections are either restatements of arguments made in his complaint and Case 5:24-cv-00009-H Document 27 Filed 01/08/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID 81 questionnaie responses, arguments thoroughly addressed by the FCR, mere disagreements with the Magistrate Judge's wording, or conclusory statements insisting that his claims have merit. However, Plaintiffs objections do not overcome the conclusions as to his claims contained in the FCR. In short, the FCR conectly concludes that Plaintiffhas failed to state a claim. Thus, the Court overrules Plaintiffs objections and accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court therefore orders that Plaintiffs complaint and all claims alleged within it are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. $0 1915, 1915A. All reliefnot expressly granted and any pending motions are denied. The Court will enter judgment accordingly. So ordered. Daredlanuary 6 ,2026 JAMES SLEY HENDRIX Unit tates District Judge 2