Response to the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation (re Dkt. 21, 23)¶
Bass v. TTUHSC, No. 5:25-cv-00244-H-BV (N.D. Tex.) · Dkt. 24 · 2026-01-12 · PDF
Text extracted from the PDF; scanned pages were read by OCR. The PDF is the authoritative copy.
Case 5:25-cv-00244-H-BV Document 24 Filed 01/12/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID 313 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUBBOCK DIVISION KEVIN N. BASS, Plaintiff, § § § § § § § § v. TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 5:25-cv-244-H-BV PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Plaintiff certifies that this filing was prepared with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence. Plaintiff has reviewed the output for accuracy and accepts full responsibility for the content. (See N.D. Tex. LR 7.2(f).) Plaintiff files this statement in response to the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge entered December 29, 2025 (ECF No. 21) regarding Plaintiff's request for preliminary injunctive relief. 1. Withdrawal of request for preliminary injunctive relief Plaintiff withdraws and does not presently pursue any request for temporary or preliminary injunctive relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 in this action, including the request embedded in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 14). Plaintiff is not seeking a TRO or a preliminary injunction at this time. 2. No objection to the Recommendation; request that the Court deny without prejudice (or as moot) Because Plaintiff has withdrawn the request for preliminary injunctive relief, Plaintiff does not file objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff has no objection to the Recommendation that the request be denied without prejudice. Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court treat the request as withdrawn and deny it without prejudice (or, if the Court prefers, deny it as moot). This withdrawal is without prejudice to a future Rule 65 motion if circumstances materially change and interim relief becomes necessary. Any future request would be presented by a separate motion supported by evidence and after notice and a good-faith effort to confer. 3. Expedited discovery -1- Case 5:25-cv-00244-H-BV Document 24 Filed 01/12/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID 314 Plaintiff likewise does not presently pursue expedited discovery. Plaintiff does not seek reconsideration of the Court's order denying expedited discovery (ECF No. 23). Dated: January 12, 2026 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Kevin N. Bass Kevin N. Bass, Pro Se Phone: 512-333-4092 Email: kbassphiladelphia@gmail.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Because this filing is being submitted after business hours, I certify that, on January 13, 2026, I will serve a true and correct copy of this filing on all Defendants by depositing it in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the last-known addresses used for service in this case. I will email a courtesy copy to the TTUHSC Office of General Counsel. Email is provided as a courtesy and not as a substitute for service unless counsel has appeared and/or consented. /s/ Kevin N. Bass -2-