Opinion
No. 1:12-CV-104-CL
04-05-2012
GARY D. PRICE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CORNING, Defendant.
ORDER
PANNER, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Although no objections have been filed, this court reviews legal principles de novo. See Lorin Corp. v Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir. 1983).
I agree with Magistrate Judge Clarke that plaintiff has failed to show any basis for subject matter jurisdiction. I also agree that in light of the allegations of the complaint, no amendment could cure the jurisdictional defect. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Clarke.
CONCLUSION
Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#5) is adopted. This action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (#1) is denied as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
OWEN M. PANNER
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
GARY D. PRICE, Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF CORNING, Defendant.
JUDGMENT
Based on the record, this action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
OWEN M. PANNER
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE