Seiber v. Phillips

Filing 13

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 12 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge McCook's findings of fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Report and Recommendation. [Doc. 12]. Thus, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [Doc. 10] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A separate Judgment Order will enter. Signed by District Judge Charles E Atchley, Jr on 01/07/2025. (Copy of Order mailed to Joey Seiber) (CAT)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
JOEY DOUGLAS SEIBER,
Plaintiff,
v.
JACKIE PHILLIPS,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:24-cv-285
Judge Atchley
Magistrate Judge McCook

ORDER
On December 18, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Jill E. McCook filed a Report and
Recommendation [Doc. 12] pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Rules of this Court. Magistrate
Judge McCook granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. [Id. at 2].
Magistrate Judge McCook also screened the Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915
and found that Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claim for deprivation of property is untimely. [Id. at 4].
Moreover, Magistrate Judge McCook concluded that Plaintiff failed to state a claim for relief based
on his failure to plead the inadequacy of post-deprivation remedies available under Tennessee state
law. [Id. at 4–5]. Given these findings, Magistrate Judge McCook recommends that the Court
dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. [Id. at 6].
Plaintiff has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to do
so has now passed.1 The Court has nonetheless reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well
as the record, and agrees with Magistrate Judge McCook’s conclusions.

1
Magistrate Judge McCook advised Plaintiff that he had fourteen days in which to object to the Report and
Recommendation and that failure to do so would waive any right to appeal. [Doc. 12 at 6 n.5]; see Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b)(2); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148-51 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require
district court review of a magistrate judge’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when
neither party objects to those findings.”).

Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge McCook’s findings of
fact and conclusions of law as set forth in the Report and Recommendation. [Doc. 12]. Thus,
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [Doc. 10] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A separate
Judgment Order will enter.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Charles E. Atchley, Jr.
___ c
CHARLES E. ATCHLEY, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2