IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MAURINE F. PARKER, #02212994 § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:22-cv-00029-JRG-RSP DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § ORDER OF DISMISSAL Petitioner Maurine Parker, a prisoner confined at the Crain Unit within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), proceeding pro se, filed this habeas action. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case. On November 13, 2023, Judge Payne issued a Report, (Dkt. #30), recommending that Petitioner’s petition be dismissed, without prejudice, for Petitioner’s failure to comply with an order of the Court. A copy of this Report was sent to Petitioner at her last-known address. To date, however, Petitioner neither filed objections to the Report nor communicated with the Court since prior to the issuance of the Report. Because objections to Judge Payne’s Report have not been filed, Petitioner is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243 (1989) (holding that where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #30), is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. Further, it is ORDERED that the above-styled habeas action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, for Petitioner’s failure to comply with an order of the Court. Petitioner is further DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte, which refers to this cause number and does not prevent refiling. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED. So ORDERED and SIGNED this Ist day of March, 2024. RODNEY GILSTRAP \ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE