Dubar v. Hanks ( 2024 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION Case No. 7:23-cv-01655-M-RJ MABLE DUBAR, ) Plaintiff, V. ORDER RYAN HANKS, et al., Defendants. This matter comes before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. [DE 14]. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), Judge Jones recommends that this court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss [DE 6], dismiss the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and deny as moot Plaintiffs motion to deposit funds [DE 5]. To date, no objections have been filed. 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 court GRANTS the motion to dismiss [DE 6] DISMISSES the complaint without prejudice. The court DENIES as MOOT Plaintiffs motion to deposit funds [DE 5]. SO ORDERED this 2 / day of April, 2024. al c {VI yours VY RICHARD E. MYERS Ii CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE