Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

TOMASSI v. MEDICAL RECOVERY SYSTEMS, INC., 14-10929. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20141119d34 Visitors: 11
Filed: Nov. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 18, 2014
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [10] NANCY G. EDMUNDS, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's October 14, 2014 Report and Recommendation. Being fully advised in the premises and having reviewed the record and the pleadings, the Court hereby REJECTS IN PART and ACCEPTS IN PART the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. 1 The Magistrate Judge recommended that Defendant's motion t
More

OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [10]

NANCY G. EDMUNDS, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's October 14, 2014 Report and Recommendation. Being fully advised in the premises and having reviewed the record and the pleadings, the Court hereby REJECTS IN PART and ACCEPTS IN PART the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.1

The Magistrate Judge recommended that Defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 12(b)(6) be granted, but that the Court should provide Plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint as exemplified in Wallack v. Mercantile Adjustments Bureau, Inc., No. 14-10387, 2014 WL 1515852, at *3 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 18, 2014) (Rosen, C.J.). In Wallack, however, the court noted that just as it was about to issue its opinion dismissing the case, an attorney entered an appearance on the plaintiff's behalf. Id. at *3, n.2. The court noted that this was "an important factor" in its decision to allow the plaintiff to amend his complaint. Id.

In this case, no attorney for Plaintiff has filed an appearance. Indeed, Plaintiff failed to respond to Defendant's motion to dismiss and also failed to file any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, in contrast to Wallack, this Court declines to provide Plaintiff with an unrequested opportunity to amend his complaint.

Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. No timely objections were filed.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer