Richardson v. State of North Carolina et al

Filing 7

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 4 Memorandum and Recommendations. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 8/16/2011. Copy sent to the plaintiff via regular mail. (Edwards, S.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

WESTERN DIVISION

No.5:11-CV-256-F

LORENZO RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff,

v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA and
DIVISION OF MENTAL HEALTH,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

This matter is before the court for consideration ofthe Memorandum and Recommendation
("M&R") [DE-4] filed by United States Magistrate Judge David W. Daniel concerning the frivolity
review of the pro se Plaintiffs complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Therein, Judge Daniel
recommended that Plaintiffs complaint be dismissed on frivolity review for failure to state a claim
on which relief may be granted in federal court. Plaintiff timely filed an objection [DE-6] to Judge
Daniel's M&R. For the reasons stated below, the court overrules Plaintiff s objection and orders that
Plaintiffs complaint be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted.

I. ANALYSIS
A district court may "designate a magistrate judge to submit ... proposed findings offact and
recommendations for the disposition" ofa variety of motions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The court
then must "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 )(C). Upon review

of the record, "the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge." ld.
In the M&R, Judge Daniel observes that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted. In his objection to the M&R, Plaintiff offers no argument that alters this analysis.
Moreover, after a full and careful review of the M&R and the record, the court determines that the
M&R is in all aspects correct and in accordance with the law.

Consequently, after careful

consideration of the objection and M&R de novo, the court overrules Plaintiffs objection.

II. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the court ADOPTS the recommendation [DE-4] as its own. The court overrules
Plaintiffs objection [DE-6] and orders that Plaintiffs complaint be DISMISSED for failure to state
a claim on which relief may be granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
SO ORDERED.
This the 16th day of August, 2011.

ES C. FOX
nior United States District Judge

2