Timothy E. Suggs v. Prince Court LLC, Letecia Cortez, and Jose Cortez

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION NO. 4:25-CV-112-FL-BM

TIMOTHY E. SUGGS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ORDER PRINCE COURT LLC, LETECIA ) CORTEZ, and JOSE CORTEZ ) ) Defendants. )

This matter is before the court for review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint (DE 7) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). United States Magistrate Judge Brian S. Meyers entered memorandum and recommendation (“M&R”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), wherein it is recommended plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed. (DE 9). Plaintiff did not file objections to the M&R, and the time within which to make any objection has expired.1 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(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., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005); Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir. 1983).

1 On March 19, 2026, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. (DE 10). Even if the court broadly construed this filing as objections to the M&R, same were not filed within the 14-day deadline noted in the M&R. The magistrate judge recommends dismissal of plaintiffs federal law claims with prejudice and dismissal of plaintiffs state law claims without prejudice. 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. Plaintiff’s federal claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and plaintiffs state law claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (DE 5) is TERMINATED AS MOOT. The clerk of court is DIRECTED to close the case.

SO ORDERED, this the 26th day of March, 2026.

Cte United States District Judge