Crystal Carolyn Horton v. Felicia Renay Barbera, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN DIVISION Case No. 4:25-CV-00115-M-KS CRYSTAL CAROLYN HORTON, Plaintiff, V. ORDER FELICIA RENAY BARBERA, et al.

Defendants. a This matter comes before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation (““M&R’”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Swank [DE 48]. Therein, Judge Swank recommends that Felicia Barbera’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 22] be denied as moot now that the original complaint is no longer operative. /d at 2. The M&R, along with instructions and a deadline for filing objections, was served on the parties on January 7, 2026. See id. Neither party filed a timely objection.

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.” /d. § 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 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. See Diamond, 416 F.3d at 315. For the reasons stated therein, Felicia Barbera’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 22] is DENIED AS MOOT.

SO ORDERED this 27 day of January, 2026.

RICHARD E. MYERS II CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE