IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION WILLIAM ROBERT YARBROUGH HILL PLAINTIFF

V. NO, 3:24-cv-00349-GHD-RP

ROBERT STEWART; et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION On consideration of the file and records in this action, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation [4] of the United States Magistrate Judge dated December 6, 2024, regarding the dismissal with prejudice of this pro se action for failure to state a plausible claim and because the Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, was on that date duly served upon the Plaintiff; and that the Plaintiff's objections [5, 6, 8] thereto have been filed and reviewed by the Court. The Magistrate Judge issued the Report and Recommendation after reviewing the Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to

(e)(2) because the Plaintiff is seeking leave of court to proceed in forma pauperis [4]. . For the reasons aptly set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted as the opinion of the Court. The Plaintiff's Complaint, while no doubt sincerely drafted, simply does not state a plausible claim for relief and his claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The Court shall therefore dismiss the Plaintiff's claims with prejudice. See, e.g., Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co.,

, 114 8.Ct. 1673,

(1994); Neitzke v. Williams,

,

,

(1989); Moore v.

McDonald,

(Sth Cir. 1994); James by James v. Sadler,

(Sth Cir. 1990). The Court therefore ORDERS the following: 1) the Report and Recommendation [4] of the United States Magistrate Judge dated December 6, 2024, is hereby APPROVED AND ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court; and 2) this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. SO ORDERED, this, the +7 day of January, 2025.

SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE