Lunsford v. Davidson County Sheriffs Office

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

RESHAWN M. LUNSFORD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) NO. 3:19-cv-00079 v. ) JUDGE RICHARDSON ) DAVIDSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S ) OFFICE, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 30), to which no Objections have been filed. The failure to object to a report and recommendation releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Frias v. Frias, No. 2:18-cv-00076, 2019 WL 549506, at * 2 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2019); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., Case No. 18-cv-11851, 2019 WL 1242372, at * 1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). The district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made. Ashraf v. Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879, 881 (W.D. Tenn. 2018); Benson v. Walden Security, Case No. 3:18-cv-0010, 2018 WL 6322332, at * 3 (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 4, 2018). The district court should adopt the magistrate judge’s findings and rulings to which no specific objection is filed. Id. Here, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Defendants Ramsey and Jones be afforded qualified immunity and that their Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 10) be granted. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED, and Defendant Ramsey and Jones’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 10) is GRANTED. All claims against Ramsey and Jones are DISMISSED, and the stay of discovery in this action is lifted. IT IS SO ORDERED.

ELI RICHARDSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE