Ashqar v. LaRose, 4:18CV1141. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20190325c67
Visitors: 15
Filed: Mar. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 22, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 35) to Grant Respondents' Motion to Dismiss Improper Respondents. (Doc. 9). Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by March 18, 2019. Petitioner did not object to the Motion to Dismiss, nor has he filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides that obje
Summary: MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 35) to Grant Respondents' Motion to Dismiss Improper Respondents. (Doc. 9). Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by March 18, 2019. Petitioner did not object to the Motion to Dismiss, nor has he filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides that objec..
More
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 35) to Grant Respondents' Motion to Dismiss Improper Respondents. (Doc. 9). Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by March 18, 2019. Petitioner did not object to the Motion to Dismiss, nor has he filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after service. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2). Petitioner has failed to timely file any such objections. Therefore, the Court must assume that Petitioner is satisfied with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation. Any further review by this Court would be duplicative and an inefficient use of the Court's limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and GRANTS Respondents' Motion to Dismiss Improper Defendants. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 21, the Court dismisses Respondents Christopher J. LaRose, Michael V. Bernacke, Thomas Homan, and Kirstjen M. Nielsen from the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
