IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN DIVISION □ No. 4:23-CV-87-D

TIMOTHY BEST, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, ) and INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, ) ) Defendants. )

On May 19, 2023, Timothy Best (“Best” or “plaintiff’), proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against the Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service [D.E. 1] and motion to proceed in forma pauperis under

[D.E. 2]. On May 22, 2023, pursuant to

(b)(1), the court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. for a Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) and for a frivolity review [D.E. 5]. On August 10, 2023, Judge

Jones granted the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and issued an M&R recommending that the | court dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted [D.E. “The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to make a de novo determination of . those portions of the magistrate judge’s report or specified proposed findings or recommendations □ to which objection is made.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,

(4th □ Cir. 2005) (cleaned up); see

(b)(1). Absent a timely objection, “a district courtneed — not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the □

face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond,

(quotation omitted). If a party makes only general objections, de novo review is not required. See Wells v.

Shriners Hosp.,

(4th Cir. 1997). In “order to preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge’s report, a party must object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as reasonably to alert the district court of the true ground for the objection.” □

Martin v. Duffy,

(4th Cir. 2017) (quotation omitted); see United States v. Midgette,

(4th Cir. 2007). Best did not object to the M&R. Therefore, the court reviews for clear error. See Diamond,

. The court has reviewed the M&R and the record. There is no clear error on the | face of the record. See

In sum, the court ADOPTS the conclusions in the M&R [D.E. 6] and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Best’s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The clerk shall close the case. SO ORDERED. This 13 day of September, 2023. □

Sees — United States District Judge