Carter v. The City of Raleigh et al

Filing 8

ORDER granting 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; adopting 6 Memorandum and Recommendations; denying 7 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 7/9/2018. (Briggeman, N.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:18-CV-160-D

DANIELLE A. CARTER,
Plaintiff,

v.
THE CITY OF RALEIGH, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

On June 18, 2018, Magistrate Judge Jones issued

ORDER

a Memorandum and Recommendation

("M&R") and recommended that plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis be granted and
that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice [D.E. 6]. Plaintiff did not file objections to the
M&R. On June 18, 2018, plaintiff filed a request for attorney representation [D.E. 7].
"The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of
those portions of the magistrate judge's report or specified proposed findings or recommendations
towhichobjectionismade." Diamond v. Colonial Life &Accident Ins. Co., 416F.3d310, 315 (4th
Cir. 2005) (emphasis, alteration, and quotation omitted); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). 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." Diamond,
416 F.3d at 315 (quotation omitted).
·The court has reviewed the M&R, and the record. The court is satisfied that there is no clear
error on the face of the record, and the court adopts the conclusions in the M&R.

In sum, plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis [D.E. 1] is GRANTED, and

plaintiff's complaint [D.E. 1-1] is DISl\1ISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion for an attorney
[D.E. 7] is DENIED.
SO ORDERED. This _1_ day of July 2018.

2