Edwin Holliday v. State Employee Credit Union

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:25-CV-00810-M-RJ EDWIN HOLLIDAY, Plaintiff, v. ORDER STATE EMPLOYEE CREDIT UNION, Defendant.

This matter comes before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. [DE 4]. Therein, Judge Jones recommends that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The M&R, along with instructions and a deadline for filing objections, was served on the parties on January 16, 2026. See id. Neither party filed a timely objection. A magistrate judge’s recommendation carries no presumptive weight. The court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the ... recommendation[ ] . . . receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); accord Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 271 (1976). The court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Jd. § 636(b)(1). Absent a specific and timely objection, the court reviews only for “clear error” and need not give any explanation for adopting tie recommendation. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005). Upon careful review of the M&R and the record presented, and finding no clear error, the court ADOPTS the recommendation of the magistrate judge as its own. See Diamond, 416 F.2d

at 315. For the reasons stated therein, Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute and his Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [DE 2] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

- SO ORDERED this ae _ day of February, 2026. On MW\ 40s RICHARD E. MYERS I CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE