Milton L. Reed, Sr. v. Officer Tuck, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHEASTERN DIVISION MILTON L. REED, SR., Plaintiff, v. Case No. 2:25-cv-2055-HDM-NAD OFFICER TUCK, et al., Defendants.

ORDER On February 24, 2026, U.S. Magistrate Judge Nicholas A. Danella issued a Report and Recommendation in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) recommending that the court dismiss Mr. Reed’s complaint without prejudice. (Doc. 7). No party has objected to the Report and Recommendation.

If a party objects to a portion of a Magistrate Judge’s report or proposed findings or recommendations, the district court must review those portions of the report to which the party has specifically objected de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Unchallenged portions of a Magistrate Judge’s report are reviewed for clear error. Haywood v. Green, 695 F. Supp. 3d 1315, 1318 (N.D. Ala. 2023). The district court may, in its review, “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part,” the Magistrate Judge’s findings or recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Having reviewed the proposed findings and recommendations for clear error, the court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, (doc. 7), should be ACCEPTED. The court hereby ADOPTS it as the findings of the court.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to DISMISS this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Mr. Reed’s failure to prosecute. The Clerk is directed to close this file.

DONE and ORDERED on March 12, 2026.

(AOI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE