IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

RICKY OLIVER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) NO. 3:19-cv-00488 v. ) JUDGE RICHARDSON ) DANIEL KNIGHT, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 9), to which no Objections have been filed. The failure to object to a report and recommendation releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Frias v. Frias, No. 2:18-cv-00076,

, at *2 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2019); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., Case No. 18-cv-11851,

, at *1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn,

(1985)). The district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made. Ashraf v. Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc.,

(W.D. Tenn. 2018); Benson v. Walden Security, Case No. 3:18-cv- 0010,

, at *3 (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 4, 2018). The district court should adopt the magistrate judge’s findings and rulings to which no specific objection is filed.

Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff’s failure to serve process and failure to prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) and 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED.

ELI RICHARDSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE