Opinion
Civil Action 1:23-cv-00109
10-19-2023
JOSE ROCHA, JR., Plaintiff, v. ENRIQUE DE LA GARZA DECEASED INSURED LIFE INSURANCE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ROLANDO OLVERA, UNITED STATES DISTRIC JUDGE
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiffs “Complaint” (Dkt. No. 1) and the “Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) (Dkt. No. 5). The R&R recommended the Court: (1) dismiss without prejudice Plaintiffs Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) for lack of jurisdiction; and (2) direct the Clerk of Court to close this case.
No objections were filed by either party. When no objections are filed to a magistrate judge's ruling, the district court applies the “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law” standard of review. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989). Finding no clear error, abuse of discretion, or finding contrary to law, the R&R is ADOPTED.
Before the Court is also a “Motion for Extension” (“Motion”) (Dkt. No. 8) filed by Plaintiff requesting, among other things, that the Court provide him with the correct forms and instructions to refile his complaint. Because the Court adopts the R&R and finds it lacks subject matter jurisdiction (See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332) over Plaintiffs claims, his Motion (Dkt. No. 8) is DENIED AS MOOT.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs claims against Defendants are DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to close this case.