ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT, AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON, District Judge.

Plaintiff Nathaniel Ward-el, a prisoner, filed this pro se civil rights action on January 21, 2015. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants James Lucky, Lacy O'Connor, Willie Riley, Penny Landrum, and Mashawn Campbell, employees of the Cooper Street Correctional Facility (JCS), violated his rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 by conspiring to retaliate against him for engaging in protected conduct under the First Amendment. ECF No. 1. Specifically, Ward-el alleged that after he expressed intent to notify authorities of staff corruption at the jail facility, Defendant Library Technician Lucky issued him a false Class II misconduct violation for being out of place on August 17, 2012. Ward-el claims that after he filed a grievance against Lucky on August 20, 2012 Defendants then conspired to transfer him in retaliation. Id.

On March 23, 2015 Defendants filed a joint motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 9. On April 27, 2015, Plaintiff Ward-el filed objections to Defendants' motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 18. He also filed a motion to dismiss Defendant Lacey O'Connor from the action. ECF No. 16.

On March 10, 2016, Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis issued a report recommending that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted and Ward-el's motion to dismiss be denied as moot. ECF No. 23. Judge Dawkins reasoned that Defendants had carried their burden of showing that Plaintiff Ward-el had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. §1997e(a). She therefore recommended dismissing Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice.

Although Magistrate Judge Dawkins's report explicitly states that the parties to this action could object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, neither Plaintiff nor Defendants filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the Magistrate Judge's report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, ECF No. 23, is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 9, is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Ward-el's motion to dismiss, ECF No. 17, is DENIED as moot.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Ward-el's complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED without prejudice.

It is further ORDERED that permission to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED. An appeal would be frivolous and could not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. §1915 (a)(3); Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962).