# Herring v. Cloud Based

> District Court, E.D. North Carolina · December 21, 2020

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10251319

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. North Carolina
- **Decided:** December 21, 2020
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10251319

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 7:20-cv-187-BO
TOMMY LEE HERRING, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
V. ) O R D E R
)
)
CLOUD BASED,N EW HANOVER COURT, )
MARGARET HAGETT,a nd N.C. MEDICAL )
BOARD, )
)
Defendants. )
This matter is before the Court on the Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R) of
United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones,J r. [DE 5]. No objections to the M&R have been
filed,a nd the matter is ripe for review. For the reasons discussed below,t he Court adopts the
M&R in its entirety and plaintiff's complaint is dismissed because the claims are time-barred.
A district court is required to review de novo those portions of an M&R to which a party
timely files specific objections or where there is plain error. 28 U .S.C. § 636(b) (1 ); Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need
not conduct de novo review,b ut instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the
face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins.
Co., 416 F.3d 310,315 (4th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation and citation omitted).
No party has objected to the M&R and the time for doing so has passed. The Court has
reviewed the M&R and is satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record.
Accordingly,t he M&R is ADOPTED.
CONCLUSION
The M&R of Judge Jones is ADOPTED. [DE 5]. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma
pauperis is GRANTED and plaintiffs claims are DISMISSED because any cause of action would
have accrued more than three years before the filing of plaintiff's proposed complaint. The clerk
is DIRECTED to close the case.

SO ORDERED, this the IP say of December, 2020.

Ae W. BOYLE f
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUNGE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10251319. Public record. Not legal advice.