Dudley v. Arkansas Insurance Department

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION KARANYA-MARQUIS DUDLEY PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:24-cv-4055 ARKANSAS INSURANCE DEPARTMENT; and STATE OF ARKANSAS DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court are two Report and Recommendations (“R&R”) issued by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. ECF Nos. & 20. Judge Byrant recommends that Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 10 &13) be granted because Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.1 Plaintiff 0F filed an objection to the R&Rs (ECF No. 21) but it does not address any substantive basis of Judge Bryant’s recommendations, thus failing to trigger a de novo review of the R&Rs. See Griffini v. Mitchell, 31 F.3d 690, 692 (8th Cir. 1994) (noting that a specific objection is necessary to require a de novo review of a magistrate’s recommendation instead of a review for plain error).

Upon review, finding that there is no clear error on the face of the record and that Judge Bryant’s reasoning is sound, the Court adopts the R&Rs (ECF Nos. 19 & 20) in toto. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 10 & 13) hereby are GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims hereby are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED, this 25th day of October, 2024.

/s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge

1 Judge Bryant alternatively recommends that Separate Defendant State of Arkansas’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 13) be granted because Plaintiff failed to comply with service requirements under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.