Richardson v. State of North Carolina

Filing 9

ORDER granting 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the case as frivolous. Signed by US District Judge James C. Dever III on 7/5/2011. A copy of the order was mailed to the pro se plaintiff to his address of record.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

WESTERN DIVISION

No.5:11-CV-81-D

LORENZO RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff,

v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Defendant.

)

)

)

)
)
)
)
)

)

ORDER

On April 26, 2011, Magistrate Judge Daniel issued a Memorandum and Recommendation
("M&R") [D .E. 7]. In that M&R, Judge Daniel recommended that plaintiff's application to proceed
in forma pauperis be allowed and that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed as frivolous. On May 5,

2011, plaintiff filed objections [D.E. 8] to the M&R.
"The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of
those portions ofthe [magistrate judge's] report or specified proposed findings or recommendations
to which objection is made." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th
Cir. 2005) (alteration in original) (emphasis removed) (quotation omitted). Absent a timely
objection, "a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itselfthat
there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Id.
(quotation omitted).
The court has reviewed the M&R and the record. As for those portions of the M&R to
which plaintiff did not object, the court is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the
record. As for the objections, the court has reviewed the objections and the M&R de novo,

plaintiff's objections are overruled.

Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is

GRANTED, and plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED as frivolous. The clerk is directed to close

the case.
SO ORDERED. This

t

day of July 2011.

States District Judge

2