Opinion
NO. 3-20-cv-00087
08-19-2020
PATRICIA BRUCE, Plaintiff, v. RYAN D. McCARTHY, Secretary of the Army, Defendant.
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 26), 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, 2019 WL 549506, at *2 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985)); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., Case No. 18-cv-11851, 2019 WL 1242372, at *1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 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., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879, 881 (W.D. Tenn. 2018); Benson v. Walden Security, Case No. 3:18-cv-0010, 2018 WL 6322332, 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. Id.
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the file. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, Defendant's Motion for Partial Dismissal (Doc. No. 13) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's tort claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff's Title VII claims remain pending.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
ELI RICHARDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE