Thompson v. Village of Phillipsburg, 3:18-cv-214. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20190517e08
Visitors: 5
Filed: May 16, 2019
Latest Update: May 16, 2019
Summary: ORDER AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. 38); AND (2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' FIRST MOTION TO DISMISS DIRECTED TO THE NOW SUPERSEDED ORIGNAL COMPLAINT (DOC. 9) THOMAS M. ROSE , District Judge . The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. 38), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b). The parties have not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time
Summary: ORDER AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. 38); AND (2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' FIRST MOTION TO DISMISS DIRECTED TO THE NOW SUPERSEDED ORIGNAL COMPLAINT (DOC. 9) THOMAS M. ROSE , District Judge . The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. 38), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b). The parties have not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time ..
More
ORDER AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. 38); AND (2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' FIRST MOTION TO DISMISS DIRECTED TO THE NOW SUPERSEDED ORIGNAL COMPLAINT (DOC. 9)
THOMAS M. ROSE, District Judge.
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. 38), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The parties have not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 38) is ADOPTED in full; and (2) Defendants' first motion to dismiss directed to the now superseded original complaint (Doc. 9) is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
