DEntremont v. Southwestern Vermont Medical Center

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED asin □□ yonr—— MOMEAS 82 GUYLAINE DENTREMONT, ) id ) BY Suny CLERK Plaintiff, ) V. Case No. 2:22-cv-210 SOUTHWESTERN VERMONT MEDICAL CENTER, ) Defendant.

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE (Docs. 1 & 5) This matter came before the court for a review of the Magistrate Judge’s February 17, 2023 Report and Recommendation (“R & R’”’) (Doc. 5), in which the Magistrate Judge recommended that the court dismiss this case without prejudice because self- represented Plaintiff Guylaine DEntremont failed to timely refile her completed application to proceed in forma pauperis.

A district judge must make a de novo determination of those portions of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to which an objection is made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Cullen v. United States, 194 F.3d 401, 405 (2d Cir. 1999). The district judge 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); accord Cullen, 194 F.3d at 405. A district judge, however, is not required to review the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of a reports and recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985).

No party has filed an objection to the R & R, and the time period to do so has expired. A review of the docket in this case reveals no further filings since the date of the Magistrate Judge’s R & R. The court therefore ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s R & R (Doc. 5) as the court’s Opinion and Order. This case is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED. he Dated at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this 3 day of March, 2023.

Christina Reiss, District Judge United States District Court