Opinion
NO. 2-20-cv-00019
01-27-2021
DAVID HAROLD WHITE, Plaintiff, v. ANDREW SAUL, Defendant.
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 21), 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); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., Case No. 18-cv-11851, 2019 WL 1242372, at * 1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). 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.
Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and the Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Clerk is directed to close the file. This Order shall constitute final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58.
Plaintiff is not proceeding pro se. At all times, she has been represented by counsel. The Court must admonish counsel that it is not appropriate to file a federal action and then abandon it, ignoring the Court's show-cause order in the process. --------
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
ELI RICHARDSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE