Filed: Jan. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER M. CASEY RODGERS , Chief District Judge . This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated December 9, 2015. ECF No. 22. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, an
Summary: ORDER M. CASEY RODGERS , Chief District Judge . This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated December 9, 2015. ECF No. 22. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and..
More
ORDER
M. CASEY RODGERS, Chief District Judge.
This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated December 9, 2015. ECF No. 22. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed objections.
Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:
1. The chief magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.
2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 15, is GRANTED on the ground that Plaintiff seeks relief against a non-existent entity, but that the Amended Complaint, ECF Nos. 9, 20, be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff's filing a second amended complaint naming a suable entity.
3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF Nos. 17, 21, is DENIED.
4. This matter is referred to the assigned magistrate judge for issuance of an order establishing a deadline for Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint against a suable entity.
DONE AND ORDERED.
