Watkins v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Filing 6

ORDER adopting 5 Memorandum and Recommendation and denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief U.S. District Judge Richard E. Myers II on 3/27/2024. (McNally, Kimberly)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
Case No. 5:24-CV-00035-M
ERICA RENEE WATKINS,
Plaintiff,
ORDER

V.

SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Defendant.

This matter comes before the court for review of the Memorandum and Recommendation
(the "Recommendation") filed on February 16, 2024, by Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II,
in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

DE 5.

In the Recommendation, Judge Numbers

recommends that the court deny Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss
the Complaint due to Plaintiff's failure to timely file suit after receiving a notice of right to sue
letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Id. at 3-5. The Recommendation,
which includes instructions and a deadline for objections, was served on February 16, 2024. See
id. at 6. Plaintiff did not object to the Recommendation. See Docket Entries dated February 16,

2024, to present.
The court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge," 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), but need only "make a de
novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made," id.

Notwithstanding that Plaintiff raised no

objections to the Recommendation, the court has reviewed the in forma pauperis application and
concurs with the Recommendation, in that Plaintiff has sufficient income and assets such that she

is not entitled to have the public bear the costs of her litigation. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); United
States v. Valdes, 300 F. Supp. 2d 82, 85 (D.D.C. 2004) (observing that court may not turn "blind

eye to [applicant' s] actual financial circumstances," which would "render[] court an unfit steward
of the public purse"). The court further discerns no clear error in the Recommendation's analysis
related to administrative exhaustion. The Recommendation [DE 5] is hereby ADOPTED, the
application to proceed in forma pauperis [DE 2] is DENIED, and Plaintiffs Complaint [DE 1] is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 1

:tt-

so ORDERED this 27

day of March, 2024.

Q; [

fYlv-4-n

~

RICHARD E. MYERS II
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT nJDGE

1

This dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff re-raising her claim of employment discrimination under a federal
statute that does not require administrative exhaustion.