Mortgage Research Center, LLC v. Halstead

Aug 31, 2026

2:25-cv-00082

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On August 6, 2026, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 44), recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff‘s motion for attorney‘s fees (D.E. 43). Plaintiff, as the only party to appear, was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge‘s memorandum and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Special Order No. C-2023-1. No objections have been timely filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge‘s memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge‘s memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass‘n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).

Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge‘s memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 44), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Plaintiff‘s motion for attorney‘s fees (D.E. 43) is GRANTED and Defendants are ORDERED to pay $6,219.00 to Plaintiff as a further obligation owed by them under the security instrument.

ORDERED on August 31, 2026.

NELVA GONZALES RAMOS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE