Summary
assessing pro se plaintiff's prima facie case for FHA claim under summary judgment standard
Summary of this case from Lyman v. Montclair at Partridge Creek, LLCOpinion
1:22-cv-788
01-04-2023
STACEY R. SMITH, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
HALA Y. JARBOU, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
On December 30, 2022, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) (ECF No. 21), recommending that the Court grant Defendants' respective motions for dismissal of the case. Before the Court is Plaintiff's objection (ECF No. 22) to the R&R.
Under Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
the district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
Plaintiff's objection does not address the substance of the R&R. It does not identify any error in the R&R. Upon review, the Court concludes that the magistrate judge's reasoning and recommendation are sound.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' objection (ECF No. 22) to the R&R is OVERRULED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the R&R (ECF No. 21) is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' motions for dismissal and/or summary judgment (ECF Nos. 11, 14) are GRANTED for the reasons set forth in the R&R.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court CERTIFIES that an appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith.
The Court will enter a judgment consistent with this Order.