Opinion
NO. 3:20-cv-00016
03-16-2021
WANDA LYNNE DIGGS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the AIR FORCE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Pending before the Court are a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. No. 24) and a document entitled "Response to Report and Recommendation to Grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss," filed by Plaintiff (who is proceeding pro se), which the Court will construe as Plaintiff's objections. (Doc. No. 25).
When a magistrate judge issues an R&R regarding a dispositive pretrial matter, the district court must review de novo any portion of the R&R to which a proper objection is made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition, review further evidence, or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. Id.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that a party may file "specific written objections" to an R&R, and Local Rule 72.02(a) provides that "Such objections must be written, must state with particularity the specific portions of the Magistrate Judge's report or proposed findings or recommendations to which an objection is made."
The Local Rule also provides that any objections must be accompanied by sufficient documentation including, but not limited to, affidavits, pertinent exhibits, and if necessary, transcripts of the record to apprise the District Judge of the bases for the objections. --------
Plaintiff's response to the R&R, in its entirety, is a quotation from the Bible, Matthew 25:31-36 and Matthew 4:17, along with the statement "May God have mercy on you all." (Doc. No. 25). No further timely objections have been filed.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), the Court has reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's response, and the file. Because Plaintiff's response does not identify with particularity the specific portions of the R&R to which objections are made, it fails to meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 and Local Rule 72.02. Plaintiff's purported objections are overruled, and the Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved.
Accordingly, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs are DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and her claims against the U.S. Department of the Air Force are DISMISSED with prejudice as time-barred. The Clerk is directed to close the file. This Order shall constitute final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
ELI RICHARDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE