From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Banner v. Rowdy

United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina
Jul 8, 2024
1:24-cv-384 (M.D.N.C. Jul. 8, 2024)

Opinion

1:24-cv-384

07-08-2024

MONTREALL BANNER, Plaintiff, v. C/O ROWDY, C/O GOMEZ, MAC MILLAN, KATY POOLE, and DEAN LOCKLEAR, Defendant.


ORDER

On May 16, 2024, the United States Magistrate Judge's Order and Recommendation (“Recommendation”) was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. (Docs. 3, 4.) No objections were filed within the time prescribed by Section 636.

Therefore, the court need not make a de novo review and the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation is hereby adopted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation, (Doc. 3), is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted as to Defendants Millan, Gomez, Poole, and Locklear but proceed as to the claim against Defendant Rowdy.


Summaries of

Banner v. Rowdy

United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina
Jul 8, 2024
1:24-cv-384 (M.D.N.C. Jul. 8, 2024)
Case details for

Banner v. Rowdy

Case Details

Full title:MONTREALL BANNER, Plaintiff, v. C/O ROWDY, C/O GOMEZ, MAC MILLAN, KATY…

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina

Date published: Jul 8, 2024

Citations

1:24-cv-384 (M.D.N.C. Jul. 8, 2024)