Bugoni v. Background Checkers

District Court, E.D. North Carolina

Bugoni v. Background Checkers

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:21-cv-00394-M PIERO A. BUGONI, ) Plaintiff, V. ORDER BACKGROUND CHECKERS, et al.., Defendants. __ eee This matter comes before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Brian S. Meyers [DE 6]. Pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), Judge Meyers recommended that the court dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim and improper venue. Plaintiff has not objected. A magistrate judge’s recommendation carries no presumptive weight. The court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the . .. recommendation[ ] . . . receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1); accord Mathews v. Weber,

423 U.S. 261, 271

(1976). The court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Jd. § 636(b)(1). Absent a specific and timely objection, as here, the court reviews only for “clear error” and need not give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,

416 F.3d 310, 315

(4th Cir. 2005). Upon careful review of the M&R and the record presented, and finding no clear error, the court ADOPTS the recommendation of the magistrate judge as its own. For the reasons stated

therein, the complaint is DISMISSED. _ oth SO ORDERED this _|'] day of November, 2023.

2 (V| yoys RICHARD E. MYERS Ii CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown