Opinion
2:22-cv-02453-SHL-cgc
12-11-2023
LEE A. CRAFT, Plaintiff, v. ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL, INC., Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
SHERYL H. LIPMAN CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that the Court grant Defendant St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Inc.'s (“St. Jude”) Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 24). (ECF No. 31 at PageID 161.)
A magistrate judge may submit to a district court judge proposed findings of fact and recommendations that assist in the disposition of a motion for summary judgment. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A)-(B). Parties can file objections to the proposed findings and recommendations “[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district court reviews de novo only those proposed findings of fact or conclusions of law to which a party specifically objects; the rest are reviewed for clear error. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). “When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) advisory committee notes.
Plaintiff Lee Craft's deadline to object to the R&R was October 20, 2023, and no objections have been filed. The Court has therefore reviewed the R&R in its entirety for clear error and finds none. The R&R properly describes how Plaintiff's claims of reverse sex discrimination (ECF No. 31 at PagelD 159), and race discrimination in violation of Title VII (Id. at PageID 159-61), fail as a matter of law. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's R&R, GRANTS St. Jude's Motion for Summary Judgment, and DISMISSES Mr. Craft's claims WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED,