Filed: Jan. 28, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 28, 2015
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL R. BARRETT, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by the Magistrate Judge on November 3, 2014 (Doc. 34). Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Repo
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL R. BARRETT, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by the Magistrate Judge on November 3, 2014 (Doc. 34). Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Repor..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL R. BARRETT, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by the Magistrate Judge on November 3, 2014 (Doc. 34).
Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendation have been filed.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 34) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Plaintiff's Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 33) is DENIED. If Plaintiff has not already complied with the Report and Recommendation by the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiff is reminded of the follows:
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5), plaintiff may file, within thirty (30) days after service of this Order, a motion with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed as a pauper on appeal. Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir. 1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal Service, 105 F.3d 274 (6th Cir. 1997). Plaintiff's motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed in the District Court and the District Court's statement as to the reasons for denying pauper status on appeal. Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).
Plaintiff is notified that if he does not file a motion within thirty (30) days of receiving notice of the District Court's decision as required by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5), or fails to pay the required filing fee of $505.00 within this same time period, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Callihan, 178 F.3d at 804. Once dismissed for want of prosecution, the appeal will not be reinstated, even if the filing fee or motion for pauper status is subsequently tendered, unless plaintiff can demonstrate that he did not receive notice of the District Court's decision within the time period prescribed for by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). Id.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
