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

WOODROW TOWNSEND PLAINTIFF

V. NO. 4:22-CV-162-DMB-JMV

TRINITY WELSH DEFENDANT

ORDER On September 8, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Woodrow Townsend’s “complaint [2] be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with an order of the Court.” Doc. #46 at PageID 159. The R&R warned Townsend that his “[f]ailure to timely file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations” “within fourteen (14) days” would bar him from “attacking on appeal unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court” “except upon grounds of plain error.” Id. at PageID 160. No objection to the R&R was filed. Under

(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 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.” Quintero v. State of Texas – Health and Hum. Servs. Comm’n, No. 22-50916,

, at *2 (5th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023) (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,

(S.D. Tex. 2017). 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 [46] is ADOPTED as the order of the Court. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice. A final judgment will be issued separately. SO ORDERED, this 28th day of September, 2023. /s/Debra M. Brown UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE