ANTHONY v. DOLGENCORP LLC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION
MICKEL ANTHONY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DOLGENCORP LLC,
Defendant.
*
*
*
*
*
CASE NO. 4:24-CV-194 (CDL)
O R D E R
The 	United 	States 	Magistrate 	Judge 	recently 	issued 	a 	Report
and Recommendation which recommended that this action be dismissed
without 	prejudice 	because 	of 	Plaintiff’s 	failure 	to 	comply 	with
the 	Magistrate’s 	order 	to 	recast 	his 	complaint 	to 	include 	more
specific 	factual 	allegations. 	R. 	& 	R. 	(Sept. 	29, 	2025), 	ECF 	No.
11. 	The 	Court 	adopted 	that 	Report 	and 	Recommendation, 	finding
that 	the 	United 	States 	Magistrate 	Judge’s 	recommendation 	was 	not
clear error. 	Order (Oct. 23, 2025), ECF No. 13. 	Less than a week
after 	the 	Court 	entered 	the 	Order 	adopting 	the 	Report 	and
Recommendation, 	Plaintiff 	filed 	a 	motion 	for 	reconsideration,
explaining 	that 	he 	had 	not 	responded 	to 	the 	Report 	and
Recommendation 	because 	he 	did 	not 	receive 	it. 	Instead, 	it 	was
returned to the Court. 	Mail Returned (Oct. 15, 2025), ECF No. 12.
The Court construes Plaintiff’s present motion for reconsideration
(ECF No. 15) as an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and
the 	Court 	finds 	that 	the 	objection 	should 	be 	considered 	timely
Case 4:24-cv-00194-CDL Document 16 Filed 11/18/25 Page 1 of 3

2
under the circumstances of this case given that Plaintiff did not
receive 	the 	Report 	and 	Recommendation 	when 	it 	was 	issued.
Therefore, the Court hereby VACATES the order adopting the Report
and Recommendation, as well as the judgment of dismissal.
Given Plaintiff’s objection to the Report and Recommendation,
the 	Court 	must 	perform 	a 	de 	novo 	review 	of 	the 	record. 	In 	his
objection, 	Plaintiff 	set 	forth 	additional, 	specific 	facts 	about
his 	religious 	discrimination 	and 	retaliation 	claims, 	including
that 	he 	is 	a 	Jehovah’s 	Witness, 	that 	it 	is 	against 	his 	religious
beliefs 	to 	sell 	tobacco, 	and 	that 	a 	supervisor 	told 	him 	when 	he
was 	hired 	that 	it 	would 	not 	be 	a 	problem 	if 	he 	could 	not 	sell
tobacco. 	Plaintiff also stated in his objection that he was fired
shortly 	after 	he 	asked 	his 	supervisor 	for 	a 	day 	off 	to 	attend 	a
religious convention, which was also soon after Plaintiff filed a
charge 	of 	discrimination 	with 	the 	Equal 	Employment 	Opportunity
Commission alleging religious discrimination. 	Finally, Plaintiff
stated in his objection that he was replaced with someone who does
not share his religious beliefs.
Had 	the 	Court 	received 	the 	objection 	before 	it 	adopted 	the
Report and Recommendation, the Court would have remanded the matter
to 	the 	Magistrate 	for 	additional 	consideration 	in 	light 	of 	the
more 	specific 	allegations. 	To 	ensure 	that 	all 	of 	Plaintiff’s
factual 	allegations 	are 	in 	a 	single 	document, 	the 	Court 	orders
Plaintiff to file an amended recast complaint, which should include
Case 4:24-cv-00194-CDL Document 16 Filed 11/18/25 Page 2 of 3

3
the 	factual 	allegations 	from 	Plaintiff’s 	original 	complaint, 	his
recast 	complaint, 	and 	his 	objection/motion 	for 	reconsideration.
Plaintiff shall file the amended recast complaint by December 16,
2025. 	Plaintiff 	is 	hereby 	notified 	that 	if 	his 	amended 	recast
complaint 	does 	not 	include 	specific 	facts 	to 	support 	a 	plausible
claim, 	then 	this 	action 	will 	be 	dismissed. 	Once 	Plaintiff 	files
the 	amended 	recast 	complaint, 	the 	Magistrate 	shall 	review 	it 	and
determine whether the amended recast complaint should proceed for
further factual development.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 18th day of November, 2025.
S/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Case 4:24-cv-00194-CDL Document 16 Filed 11/18/25 Page 3 of 3