Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia adopts a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff John Joyce be permitted to amend his complaint. The court grants the motion for leave to amend and directs Plaintiff to file the amended complaint within seven days.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should adopt the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation when no objections were filed and no clear error appeared on the face of the record.
- Whether Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend the complaint.
Holdings
- When no objections are filed to a magistrate judge's recommendation, the district court need not conduct de novo review and may accept the recommendation after satisfying itself that no clear error appears on the face of the record.
- Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint was granted, and Plaintiff was directed to file the amended complaint within seven days of the order's entry.
Key quotations
“in the absence of any objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation, the Court “need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation””’”
Factual background
The plaintiff moved for leave to amend the complaint. The magistrate judge recommended granting the motion, and no party filed objections by the stated deadline.
Procedural history
Magistrate Judge Lindsey R. Vaala recommended granting Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. After the objection deadline passed without objections, the district court reviewed the Report for clear error, approved and adopted it, granted the motion, and directed Plaintiff to file the amended complaint within seven days.
Remand instructions
Plaintiff was directed to file the amended complaint within seven days of entry of the order.