Opinion
Civil Action 1:22-cv-366
11-16-2022
SIDNEY RAY SNELLINGS v. CHRISTOPHER L. NORSWORTHY, ET AL.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHRISTINE L. STETSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Sidney Ray Snellings, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled lawsuit. This matter was referred to the undersigned United State magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.
Plaintiff has filed a letter motion asking that this case be voluntarily dismissed (doc. #4). Neither an answer nor a motion for summary judgment have been filed in this matter. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff is entitled to dismiss his lawsuit prior to the filing of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. His motion requesting voluntary dismissal should therefore be granted and this case dismissed without prejudice.
Recommendation
Plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal should be granted and this lawsuit should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).
Objections
Objections must be (1) specific, (2) in writing, and (3) served and filed within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 6(a), 6(b) and 72(b).
A party's failure to object bars that party from (1) entitlement to de novo review by a district judge of proposed findings and recommendations, Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988), and (2) appellate review, except on grounds of plain error, of unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court, Douglass v. United Serv. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).