Holt v. City of Lincoln, Nebraska

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

JEFFREY L. HOLT JR.,

Plaintiff, 4:23CV3239

vs. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CITY OF LINCOLN, NEBRASKA, AYARS AND AYARS, INC., DREW CROMWELL, individual being sued in their individual capacity; JOSHUA GOSSARD, individual being sued in their individual capacity; MEGAN NELSON, individual being sued in their individual capacity; NOLAN HAUSER, individual being sued in their individual capacity; ANDREW RIPLEY, individual being sued in their individual capacity; RANDALL CLARK, individual being sued in their individual capacity; JAYDN FOSTER, individual being sued in their individual capacity; and TREVOR SCHMIDT, individual being sued in their individual capacity;

Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation (Filing No. 41) that the claims against Defendant Drew Cromwell be dismissed for failure of service and want of prosecution. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). There are no objections to the Findings and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) provides for de novo review only when a party objected to the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations. See Peretz v. United States, 501 U.S. 923, 939 (1991). Failure to object to a finding of fact in a magistrate judge's recommendation may be construed as a waiver of the right to object to the district judge's order adopting the recommendation of the finding of fact. NECivR 72.2(f). Plaintiff was expressly advised that “failing to file an objection to this recommendation as provided in the local rules of this Court may be held to be a waiver of any right to appeal the Court’s adoption of the recommendation.” (Filing No. 41 at 2.) And the failure to file an objection eliminates not only the need for de novo review, but any review by the Court. Thomas Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-51 (1985); United States v. Wise, 588 F.3d 531, 537 n.5 (8th Cir. 2009); see Daley v. Marriott Int'l, Inc., 415 F.3d 889, 893 (8th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation (Filing No. 41) are adopted. 2. The claims against Defendant Drew Cromwell are dismissed without prejudice. Dated this 24th day of July, 2024.

BY THE COURT: pusom// Daze United States District Judge