IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:25-CV-00066-M

COREY ATKINSON, JR., ) Plaintiff, ) V. ORDER JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendant. ) a) This matter comes before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) [DE 6]. Pursuant to

(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, I] issued a memorandum and recommendation (“M&R”), recommending that this court dismiss Plaintiff's complaint for his failure to state a plausible claim for relief. DE 17. Judge Numbers instructed the Plaintiff to file any written objections to the recommendation within fourteen days after service of the M&R, or May 15, 2025.

No objections have been filed; the court notes that on May 9, 2025, the M&R was returned to the court as undeliverable to the Plaintiff and, on May 20, 2025, the Clerk of the Court received a call from the Plaintiff with a change of his address. The Clerk mailed another copy of the M&R to Plaintiff at that time; however, no objection has been filed within the “new” deadline period (on or before June 6, 2025) or since that time. The matter is now ripe for consideration by this court. 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.”

(b)(1); accord

Mathews v. Weber,

(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, the court reviews only for “clear error” and need not give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Diamond vy. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,

(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 Defendant’s motion [DE 6] is GRANTED and Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED this ath day of June, 2025.

Re Lois RICHARD E. MYERS II CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE