Jamal Marcal Mcclam Pretty v. Cava Group, Inc.

E.D. North Carolina

Jamal Marcal Mcclam Pretty v. Cava Group, Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina·Decided February 3, 2026·No. 5:25-cv-00679·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:25-CV-00679-M-RJ JAMAL MARCAL MCCLAM PRETTY, Plaintiff, ORDER CAVA GROUP, INC., 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 5]. After conducting a frivolity review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), Judge Jones recommends that Plaintiffs Title VII retaliatory termination claim be permitted to proceed but that his racial discrimination, sex-based discrimination, and hostile work environment claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim. /d. at 9. The M&R, along with instructions and a deadline for filing objections, was served on the parties on January 14, 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.” /d. § 636(b)(1). Absent a specific and timely objection, the court reviews only for “clear error” and need not give any explanation for adopting the 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.3d at 315. For the reasons stated therein, Plaintiff's racial discrimination, sex-based discrimination, and hostile work environment claims are DISMISSED. This case will proceed only as to Plaintiff's retaliatory termination claim.

SO ORDERED this _ day of February, 2026.

RICHARD E. MYERS II CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:25-CV-00679-M-RJ JAMAL MARCAL MCCLAM PRETTY, Plaintiff, ORDER CAVA GROUP, INC., 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 5]. After conducting a frivolity review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), Judge Jones recommends that Plaintiffs Title VII retaliatory termination claim be permitted to proceed but that his racial discrimination, sex-based discrimination, and hostile work environment claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim. /d. at 9. The M&R, along with instructions and a deadline for filing objections, was served on the parties on January 14, 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.” /d. § 636(b)(1). Absent a specific and timely objection, the court reviews only for “clear error” and need not give any explanation for adopting the 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.3d at 315. For the reasons stated therein, Plaintiff's racial discrimination, sex-based discrimination, and hostile work environment claims are DISMISSED. This case will proceed only as to Plaintiff's retaliatory termination claim.

SO ORDERED this _ day of February, 2026.

RICHARD E. MYERS II CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Jamal Marcal Mcclam Pretty v. Cava Group, Inc., (E.D.N.C. 2026).

Pincite

Jamal Marcal Mcclam Pretty v. Cava Group, Inc. (Jamal Marcal Mcclam Pretty v. Cava Group, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related