Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

FRANKLIN v. STATE, 16-12699. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20170524b18 Visitors: 12
Filed: May 23, 2017
Latest Update: May 23, 2017
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DKT. 13), GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. 9) TERRENCE G. BERG , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti's April 4, 2017 report and recommendation (Dkt. 13), recommending that Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. 9) be granted, and that Plaintiff's claims be dismissed with prejudice. The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, and finds that
More

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DKT. 13), GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. 9)

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti's April 4, 2017 report and recommendation (Dkt. 13), recommending that Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. 9) be granted, and that Plaintiff's claims be dismissed with prejudice. The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, and finds that it is well-reasoned and supported by the relevant law. The law provides that either party may serve and file written objections "[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy" of the report and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). As of this date, no party filed any objections to the report and recommendation, and the time to do so has now expired.

The district court will make a "de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made." Id. Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the record. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985). The Court will, therefore, accept the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation of April 4, 2017, as this Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Patti's Report and Recommendation of April 4, 2017 (Dkt. 13) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. 9) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against the State of Michigan are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED.

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