Cindy L. Young v. Wesley Garland et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Cindy L. Young v. Case No. 25-cv-472-LM-TSM Wesley Garland et al.

ORDER

No objection having been filed, I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Talesha L. Saint-Marc dated April 16, 2026 . “[O]nly those issues fairly raised by the objections to the magistrate's report are subject to review in the district court and those not preserved by such objection are precluded on appeal.”

Rivera-Aponte v. Gomez Bus Line, Inc., 62 F.4th 1, 10 (1st Cir. 2023) (quoting Sch. Union No. 37 v. United Nat’l Ins. Co., 617 F.3d 554, 564 (1st Cir. 2010)); see also Santos-Santos v. Torres-Centeno, 842 F.3d 163, 168 (1st Cir. 2016) (“[P]arties who fail to file objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation lose their right to appellate review.”).

Plaintiff’s request for entry of default against Agent Garland (Doc. No. 11) is denied. The motion to file a second amended complaint (Doc. No. 18) is granted. While plaintiff prematurely filed her second amended complaint (doc. 31), as document 30 approved another report and recommendation denying the motion for preservation of evidence, there has been no objection to the second amended complaint.

Therefore, document 31 is the operative complaint.

____________________________ Landya B. McCafferty United States District Judge Date: May 18, 2026 cc: Cindy L. Young, pro se Counsel of Record