Saxton v. Delta Health System

• Court: District Court, N.D. Mississippi
• Decided: April 7, 2025
• Docket: 4:24-cv-00089
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION

DARREL SAXTON, on behalf PLAINTIFF of himself and all others similarly situated

V. NO. 4:24-CV-89-DMB-DAS

DELTA HEALTH SYSTEM DEFENDANT

ORDER

On March 7, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge David A. Sanders issued a report (“R&R”) recommending this case be dismissed without prejudice. Doc. #5. The R&R warned that “[o]bjections … must be filed within 14 days” and “[f]ailure to timely file objections to the proposed findings and recommendations [in the R&R] will bar an aggrieved party from challenging on appeal both the proposed factual findings and the proposed legal conclusions that are accepted by the district court.” Id. at PageID 43–44 (citation omitted). No objection to the R&R was filed. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “[a] judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report … to which objection is made.” “[P]lain error review applies where, as here, a party did not object to a magistrate judge’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, or recommendation to the district court despite being served with notice of the consequences of failing to object.” Ortiz v. City of San Antonio Fire Dep’t, 806 F.3d 822, 825 (5th Cir. 2015) (cleaned up). “[W]here there is no objection, the Court need only determine whether the report and recommendation is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” United States v. Alaniz, 278 F. Supp. 3d 944, 948 (S.D. Tex. 2017) (citing United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989)). Because the Court reviewed the R&R for plain error and concludes that the R&R is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, the R&R [5] is ADOPTED as the order of the Court. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice. SO ORDERED, this 7th day of April, 2025. /s/Debra M. Brown UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE