Filed: Dec. 28, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 28, 2015
Summary: ORDER (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #48), (2) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (ECF #1) WITH PREJUDICE, AND (3) TERMINATING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF #36) AS MOOT MATTHEW F. LEITMAN , District Judge . On November 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge David R. Grand issued a Report and Recommendation (the "R&R") recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff Richard Short's ("Short") Complaint. ( See R&R, ECF #48.) The Magistrate Judge explained in the R&R that he had
Summary: ORDER (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #48), (2) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (ECF #1) WITH PREJUDICE, AND (3) TERMINATING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF #36) AS MOOT MATTHEW F. LEITMAN , District Judge . On November 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge David R. Grand issued a Report and Recommendation (the "R&R") recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff Richard Short's ("Short") Complaint. ( See R&R, ECF #48.) The Magistrate Judge explained in the R&R that he had p..
More
ORDER (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #48), (2) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (ECF #1) WITH PREJUDICE, AND (3) TERMINATING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF #36) AS MOOT
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, District Judge.
On November 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge David R. Grand issued a Report and Recommendation (the "R&R") recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff Richard Short's ("Short") Complaint. (See R&R, ECF #48.) The Magistrate Judge explained in the R&R that he had provided Short multiple opportunities to respond to a summary judgment motion filed by Defendant John Kelly ("Kelly") on March 20, 2015, but that Short had failed to file any response. (See id. at 1, Pg. ID 357.) For example, on October 5, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued a show cause order warning Short that if he did not respond to that order, or file a response to Kelly's summary judgment motion, by November 5, 2015, his case could be dismissed (the "Show Cause Order"). (See ECF #46 at 1-2, Pg. ID 353-354.) Short never responded to the Show Cause Order, and has still not responded to Kelly's summary judgment motion. The Magistrate Judge thus recommended that the Court dismiss Short's Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for want of prosecution.1 (See R&R at 2-3, Pg. ID 358-359.) The R&R stated that the parties could object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days. (See id. at 3-4, Pg. ID 359-360.)
Short has failed to file any objections to the R&R.2 Failure to file objections to the R&R waives any further right to appeal. See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the Magistrate Judge's R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has nevertheless reviewed the R&R and agrees with the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's November 19, 2015, Report and Recommendation (ECF #48) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, for the reasons stated in the R&R, that Short's Complaint (ECF #1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Kelly's motion for summary judgment (ECF #36) is TERMINATED AS MOOT.
