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

LOVIE D. GRANT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) NO. 3:23-cv-00063 ) v. ) JUDGE RICHARDSON ) JOYCE FULTZ, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. No. 16, “R&R”), wherein the Magistrate Judge recommends that this action be dismissed without prejudice in accordance with Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No party has filed an objection within 14 days as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 and

(b)(1). The failure to properly, specifically, and timely 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). 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, 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.

Accordingly, in the absence of any objections at all, the R&R (Doc. No. 16) is ADOPTED. The action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

This is the final order in this case. As it denies all relief, the Clerk SHALL enter judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(b)(1)(C). IT IS SO ORDERED.

ELI RICHARDSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE