Ford v. US Government ( 2024 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:24-CV-00412-M-RN SARAH FORD, Plaintiff, V. ORDER THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, Defendant. This matter comes before the court on the memorandum and recommendation (the “Recommendation” entered by Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II in this case on September 9, 2024 [DE 10]. In the Recommendation, Judge Numbers recommends that the court dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. DI 10 at 1, 4-6. The Recommendation, along with instructions and a deadline for filing objections, was served on Plaintiff on September 9. See id. at 6. Plaintiff raised no objection to the Recommendation. See Docket Entries dated September 9, 2024, to present. 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, 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 I'.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005). Upon careful review of the Recommendation and the record presented, and finding no clear error, the court ADOPTS the Recommendation [DE 10] of Judge Numbers as its own. For the reasons stated therein, Plaintiff's Complaint [DE 1] is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. SO ORDERED this _@2\°__ day of October, 2024. SL Myoes RICHARD E. MYERS II CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE