IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION

NO. 7:22-CV-157-FL

APRIL KENNEDY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) SANDERSON FARMS, INC., ) ) Defendant. )

This matter is before the court for review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint (DE 16) pursuant to

(e). United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr., entered memorandum and recommendation (“M&R”), pursuant to

(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), wherein it is recommended plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed. (DE 6). Plaintiff did not file objections to the M&R, and the time within which to make any objection has expired. In this posture, the issues raised are ripe for ruling. Upon a careful review of the M&R, the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). Because no objections have been filed, the court reviews the magistrate judge’s findings and conclusions only for clear error, and need not give any explanation for adopting the M&R. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co.,

(4th Cir. 2005); Camby v. Davis,

(4th Cir. 1983). Here, the magistrate judge recommends dismissal of plaintiff’s claims for failure to alleged sufficient facts to support plaintiff’s claims and the grounds upon which they rest. For example, although plaintiff suggests she has a discrimination claim, plaintiff alleges no names, dates, or other details to support a plausible discrimination claim against defendant. Upon careful review of the M&R, the court finds the magistrate judge’s analysis to be thorough, and there is no clear error. The court hereby ADOPTS the recommendation of the magistrate judge as its own, and plaintiffs action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The clerk of court is DIRECTED to close the case. SO ORDERED, this the 12th day of January, 2023.

United States District Judge