Bugoni v. Background Checkers ( 2023 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:21-cv-00394-M PIERO A. BUGONI, ) Plaintiff, V. ORDER BACKGROUND CHECKERS, et al.., Defendants. __ eee This matter comes before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Brian S. Meyers [DE 6]. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), Judge Meyers recommended that the court dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim and improper venue. Plaintiff has not objected. A magistrate judge’s recommendation carries no presumptive weight. The court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the . .. recommendation[ ] . . . receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); accord Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 271 (1976). The court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Jd. § 636(b)(1). Absent a specific and timely objection, as here, the court reviews only for “clear error” and need not give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005). Upon careful review of the M&R and the record presented, and finding no clear error, the court ADOPTS the recommendation of the magistrate judge as its own. For the reasons stated therein, the complaint is DISMISSED. _ oth SO ORDERED this _|'] day of November, 2023. 2 (V| yoys RICHARD E. MYERS Ii CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE