The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
NO. 7:26-CV-16-FL-RN
KATHY REAVES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
FREDDIE WILLIAMS, individually and in )
his official capacity; MELISSA )
THOMPSON, individually and in her )
official capacity; EVERETTE TEAL, )
individually and in his professional )
capacity; HERMAN LOCKLEAR, )
individually and in his professional )
capacity; DEBBIE MCKENZIE, ) ORDER
individually and in her professional )
capacity; ANGELA FAULKNER, )
individually and in her professional )
capacity; PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF )
ROBESON COUNTY; PUBLIC )
SCHOOLS OF ROBESON COUNTY )
BOARD OF EDUCATION, DANIEL F.E. )
SMITH; and BROOKS PIERCE LAW )
FIRM, )
)
Defendants. )
This matter is before the court for review of plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e). United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II, entered memorandum and
recommendation (“M&R”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
72(b), wherein it is recommended plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed. (DE 6). Plaintiff did not file
objections to the M&R, and the time within which to make any objection has expired. In this
posture, the issues raised are ripe for ruling.
Upon a careful review of the M&R, the court may “accept, reyect, or modify, in whole or
in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Because no objections have been filed, the court reviews the magistrate judge’s findings and
conclusions only for clear error, and need not give any explanation for adopting the M&R.
Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005); Camby v. Davis,
718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir. 1983).
The magistrate judge recommends dismissal of plaintiff claims for failure to state a claim
where most of her claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and the remaining
claims suffer from various pleading deficiencies. Upon careful review of the M&R, the court finds
the magistrate judge’s analysis to be thorough, and there is no clear error. The court hereby
ADOPTS the recommendation of the magistrate judge as its own. This action is hereby
DISMISSED without prejudice. All pending motions (DE 16, 17, 18, 19) are DENIED as moot.
SO ORDERED, this the 3rd day of June, 2026.
United States District Judge