Davis v. Colvin

Filing 6

ORDER ADOPTING 4 Final Report and Recommendation ; DISMISSING action WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 5/18/2015. (adg)

that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
(February 6, 2015, Order, at 3). The Magistrate Judge struck Plaintiff’s Complaint
and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days that
presented his claims for relief and stated the factual bases for each claim. (Id.
at 4-5).
Plaintiff did not comply with the Magistrate Judge’s February 6, 2015,
Order. On March 24, 2015, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court
dismiss this action for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the February 6, 2015,
Order. (R&R at 1). Plaintiff did not file any objections to the R&R.
II.

DISCUSSION
A.

Legal Standard

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v.
Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert denied, 459 U.S. 1112
(1983). A district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of
the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is
made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). With respect to those findings and
recommendations to which a party has not asserted objections, the district judge

2

must conduct a plain error review of the record. United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d
1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983).
B.

Analysis

As Plaintiff has not objected to the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, the Court
reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations for plain error. See
Slay 714 F.2d at 1095. The Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff failed to comply
with the February 6, 2015, Order, and properly recommended that the Court
dismiss this action. See LR 41.3(A)(2), NDGa. The Court finds no plain error in
Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendation. See Slay, 714 F.2d at 1095.
III.

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge E. Clayton Scofield’s

Final Report and Recommendation [4] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED this 18th day of May, 2015.

_______________________________
WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3