Parker v. Casey's General Stores Inc. et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
TAMESHA PARKER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASEY’S GENERAL STORES, INC.,
RIKKI CASAREZ, CHRISTOPHER
WULF, and JOHN DOE,
Defendants.
8:25CV505
ORDER
On September 	18, 	2025, plaintiff 	Tamesha 	Parker 	(“Parker”) 	filed 	a pro se
Objection to Notice of Removal and requested leave to amend her complaint under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 15 (Filing No. 11). Parker also filed a Motion to Remand (Filing
No. 12) to the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska. The magistrate judge1 denied
her 	request to amend 	and issued 	a Findings 	and Recommendation 	(Filing 	No. 15)
recommending the Court overrule Parker’s objection to removal and deny the motion to
remand. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the parties had fourteen days to object. Neither
has. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); NECivR 72.2.
Section 636(b)(1) provides for de novo review of a magistrate judge’s findings or
recommendations only when a party timely objects. 	See Peretz v. United States, 501 U.S.
923, 939 (1991). 	The absence of a timely objection “eliminates not only the need for de
novo review, but any review by the district court.” 	Leonard v. Dorsey & Whitney LLP,
553 F.3d 609, 619-20 (8th Cir. 2009). Because the Court has not received any objections,
IT IS ORDERED:
1 The Honorable Ryan C. Carson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of
Nebraska.
8:25-cv-00505-RFR-RCC Doc # 16 Filed: 11/25/25 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID #
<pageID>

1. 	The magistrate judge’s Findings and Recommendation (Filing No. 15) are
accepted. Any objections are deemed waived.
2. 	Plaintiff Tamesha Parker’s Objection to Notice of Removal (Filing No. 11)
and Motion to Remand (Filing No. 12) are denied.
Dated this 25th day of November 2025.
BY THE COURT:
Robert F. Rossiter, Jr.
Chief United States District Judge
8:25-cv-00505-RFR-RCC Doc # 16 Filed: 11/25/25 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID #
<pageID>