Opinion
No. 2:18-cv-02551-TLP-tmp
10-12-2018
DIANNE SMITH, Plaintiff, v. RHONDA SCOTT, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 8), which addresses Defendant's Notice of Removal. (ECF No. 1.) In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommends the matter be remanded to the Shelby County Court of General Sessions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).
Specifically, the Magistrate Judge found that the Parties lacked diversity jurisdiction because plaintiff's citizenship has not been pleaded, and the amount in controversy has not been addressed. The Magistrate Judge further concluded that Plaintiff did not present any federal question on the face of its complaint. Finally, the Magistrate Judge found that supplemental jurisdiction would be inappropriate because there is no basis for asserting original jurisdiction.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), "[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2), 6(d), 72(b)(2).
"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. Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court finds no clear error and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 8) in its entirety.
Thus, the Court Orders that this matter be remanded to the Shelby County Court of General Sessions.
SO ORDERED, this 12th day of October, 2018.
s/ Thomas L. Parker
THOMAS L. PARKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE