RULING AND ORDER

BRIAN A. JACKSON, District Judge.

Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Report and Recommendation addresses pro se Plaintiff Anthony Montecino's opposed Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 12). The Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiffs Motion be denied without prejudice because it was prematurely filed before any discovery in this action was propounded, and because it fails to conform with local rules. (Doc. 21 at p. 1). Plaintiffs motion cites no evidence, and includes no attachments. See (Doc. 12). For a viable motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff would need to wait for further factual development, such as exchanging discovery or acquiring verified evidence to reference in the motion. Further, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the local rules, which require summary judgment motions to be accompanied by a separate statement of material facts. LOCAL CIVIL RULE 56(a).

The Report and Recommendation notified the parties that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen (14) days from the date they received the Report and Recommendation to file written objections to the proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations therein. (Doc. 21. at p. 1). Neither party objected. Having carefully considered the underlying Complaint and related filings, the Court approves the IVtagistmte Judge's Report and Recommendation, and hereby adopts its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 12) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.