Haney v. Verizon Wireless

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:20-CV-699-BO MEGAN ELIZABETH HANEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) ORDER ) ) VERIZON WIRELESS, D/B/A/ CELLCO ) PARTNERSHIP. ) ) Defendant. )

This matter is before the Court on the Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, IT. [DE 4]. No objections to the M&R have been filed, and the matter is ripe for review. For the reasons discussed below, the Court adopts the M&R in its entirety. A district court is required to review de novo those portions of an M&R to which a party timely files specific objections or where there is plain error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation and citation omitted). No party has objected to the M&R, and the time for doing so has passed. The Court has reviewed the M&R and is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, the M&R is ADOPTED.

CONCLUSION The M&R of Judge Numbers is ADOPTED. [DE 4]. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. The claims against individual defendants are DISMISSED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to file the complaint and issue the summons prepared by plaintiff. The U.S. Marshal is DIRECTED to serve the summons, a copy of the complaint, and a copy of this order on defendant.

SO ORDERED, this the Aid day of April, 2021.

TERRENCE W. BOYLE | UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE