UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

EL PASO DIVISION 

DESERT FOX CUSTOM 

RESTORATIONS, INC., a New Mexico 

Corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CWS MARKETING GROUP, a Virginia 

Corporation; THE ACCURATE GROUP 

OF TEXAS, a Texas LLC; and WESTCOR 

LAND & TITLE INC., a Florida Licensed 

Insurance Co.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

EP-20-CV-00080-DCG

MEMORANDUM ORDER 

Presently before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Leon Schydlower’s “Report 

and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to Dismiss This Lawsuit for Want of Prosecution” 

(ECF No. 47). In December 2019, Plaintiff Desert Fox Custom Restorations, Inc. brought this 

lawsuit against Defendants CWS Marketing Group, The Accurate Group of Texas, and Westcor 

Land Title Insurance Company, incorrectly named as Westcor Land & Title Inc.,1

 in the United 

States District Court for the District of New Mexico. In March 2020, pursuant to the parties’ 

stipulation, the case was transferred to this Court. 

Judge Schydlower recommends that this lawsuit be dismissed without prejudice for want 

of prosecution by Plaintiff. R&R at 2, ECF No. 47. Further, at the conclusion of his Report and 

Recommendation, the magistrate judge reminded the parties that they “ha[d] fourteen days from 

service of this report and recommendation to file written objections.” Id. (capitalization 

omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The time for filing such 

1

 Westor’s Ans. to Pl.’s Compl. at 1, ECF No. 13. 

Case 3:20-cv-00080-DCG Document 50 Filed 06/30/20 Page 1 of 3
-2-

objections has passed, but no party filed any objection. See ECF No. 49. 

When a party files timely written objections to a magistrate judge’s report and 

recommendation, the district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the 

report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). As to the unobjected-to portions of the 

magistrate judge’s report or when a party does not file written objections, the district judge 

applies a “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law” standard of review. United 

States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 

(1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a 

magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither 

party objects to those findings.”). Having carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, 

the Court concludes that the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation are 

not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Leon Schydlower’s “Report and 

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to Dismiss This Lawsuit for Want of Prosecution” 

(ECF No. 47) is ACCEPTED. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims asserted against Defendants in 

the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

IT IS MOREOVER ORDERED that the District Clerk SHALL CLOSE this case and 

MAIL a copy of this Memorandum Order to Plaintiff Desert Fox Custom Restorations, Inc’s 

owner Vincent Tangredi at 103 Metz Dr. #B, Ruidoso, New Mexico, 88345. 

Case 3:20-cv-00080-DCG Document 50 Filed 06/30/20 Page 2 of 3
-3-

 So ORDERED and SIGNED this 30th day of June 2020. 

____________________________________ 

DAVID C. GUADERRAMA 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-00080-DCG Document 50 Filed 06/30/20 Page 3 of 3