ORDER

SAM A. LINDSAY, District Judge.

Before the court is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6), filed December 10, 2018. On February 22, 2019, the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge ("Report") (Doc. 23) were entered, recommending that the court grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and dismiss without prejudice this action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Because Plaintiff amended his pleadings five times before the case was removed to federal court and had the opportunity in his response to the Motion to Dismiss to state a basis for the court to exercise personal jurisdiction over Defendant but failed to do so, the magistrate judge further recommended that Plaintiff not be granted leave to amend his pleadings despite his pro se status. After entry of the Report, Plaintiff has filed a number of objections and motions in this case; however, none of these motions or objections appear to respond to the Report (Docs. 24, 25, 26, 28). Out of an abundance of caution, the court has reviewed each of these filings and determined that none include matters that could be conceivably be construed as objections to the Report.

Having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiff's responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss,* Defendant's reply in support of the Motion to Dismiss, pleadings, file, record in this case, and Report, the court determines that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of the court. Accordingly, the court grants Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6) and dismisses without prejudice this action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Further, the court directs the clerk to term all pending motions.

It is so ordered.