govinfo:USCOURTS-txed-6_23-cv-00565-1

1 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 
TYLER DIVISION 
 
JUSTIN TATUM, 
 
 Plaintiff, 
 
v. 
 
DBOSS FUNDING LLC, 
 
 Defendant. 
 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 

 
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 
This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell 
for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for disposition of the 
action. 
On December 12, 2024 , the Court entered default judgment in this case. 
Docket No. 14. The parties subsequently filed a joint motion to set aside judgment 
and to dismiss the case with prejudice. Docket No. 18. In the motion, they state that 
they reached a post -judgment settlement agreement which satisfies the default 
judgment. Id. As a result, the parties ask the Court to vacate the default judgment 
under Rule 60(b) and dismiss Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. Id. On May 18, 2026, 
Judge Mitchell issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 19), recommending 
that the parties’ motion (Docket No. 18) be granted. No written objections have been 
received. 
This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de 
novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and PageID #: 
<pageID>
 
2 
Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court 
examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. 
Alexander v. Verizon Wireless Services, LLC, 875 F.3d 243, 249 (5th Cir. 2017). 
Here, no objections were filed. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate 
Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews the legal 
conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. 
Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (holding that, if no objections to a 
Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, 
abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). 
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the 
Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. 
Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the 
United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 19) as the findings of this Court and 
GRANTS the parties’ joint motion to set aside judgment and joint motion to dismiss 
with prejudice (Docket No. 18). Accordingly, the Court VACATES the default 
judgment (Docket No. 14) and DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. 
 
So ordered and signed on this 
Jun 15, 2026 PageID #: 
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight