THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH

MICHAEL A. PERRY, ORDER ADOPTING [86] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT [77] Plaintiff, MOTION TO DISMISS

v. Case No. 1:23-cv-00065-DBB-CMR

WEBER COUNTY, et al., District Judge David Barlow

Defendants.

The Report and Recommendation1 issued by United States Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero on March 17, 2025 recommends that the court dismiss Plaintiff Michael Perry’s (“Mr. Perry”) action.2 The magistrate judge reasoned dismissal was proper because Mr. Perry failed to state any plausible claim for relief.3 The magistrate judge advised Mr. Perry of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation within 14 days of its service pursuant to

(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).4 Mr. Perry did not file an objection.5 Because he filed no written objection by the specified deadline, the court reviews the Report and Recommendation for clear error.6 Having done so, the court finds that the magistrate judge’s analysis and conclusions are sound and no clear error appears on the face of the record.

1 R. & R. to Dismiss Action, ECF No. 86. 2

. 3

4

. 5 See Docket. 6 Johnson v. Progressive Leasing, No. 2:22-cv-00052,

, at *2 (D. Utah June 16, 2023) (citing Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp.,

, 739 (7th Cir. 1999)). “[A] party’s objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation must be both timely and specific to preserve an issue for de novo review by the district court or for appellate review.” Port City Props. v. Union Pac. R. Co.,

, 1190 n.1 (10th Cir. 2008) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. 2121 E. 30th Street,

(10th Cir. 1996)). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation’ is ADOPTED. The court DISMISSES Plaintiffs action without prejudice.

Signed April 21, 2025. BY THE COURT

David Barlow United States District Judge

TECF No. 86.