Jackson v. Green et al--CONSOLIDATED WITH C10-4058-PAZ FOR DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL PER #10 ORDER

Filing 18

ORDER: Accepting 10 Report and Recommendation: Denying as Moot 4 Motion to Change Venue filed by Rodney F Jackson. Signed by Senior Judge Donald E O'Brien on 03/12/12. (Copy w/NEF mailed to pro se Plaintiff) (kfs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
WESTERN DIVISION
RODNEY F. JACKSON,
Plaintiff,

No. 11-CV-4101-DEO

vs.

ORDER

SCOTT GREEN, et al.
Defendant.
____________________
Before the Court and on file at Docket No. 10 is the
Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by Chief United
States Magistrate Judge Paul A. Zoss concerning Plaintiff’s
motion

for

change

of

venue

(Docket

No.

4).

The

R&R

recommends that the pro se motion for change of venue be
denied as moot.
I.

FACTS
This matter was removed by Defendants to this Court from

the Iowa District Court for O’Brien County on November 10,
2011.

On November 14, 2011, pro se Plaintiff Jackson filed a

motion to change venue stating:
The plaintiff respectfully requests that
such complaint is filed in this court,
plaintiff asks if such case could be
transferred to a different court due to
plaintiff’s conflict of interest in this
O’Brien County Court.

(Docket No. 4).
On January 17, 2012, the matter came before U.S. Chief
Magistrate Judge Zoss for hearing.

Judge Zoss issued an R&R

to this Court on the same date and established deadlines for
filing objections.
II.

ANALYSIS
Pursuant to statue, this Court’s standard of review for

a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is as follows:
A judge of the court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the
report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.
A judge of the court may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings
or recommendations made by the magistrate
[judge].
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Similarly, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides
for review of a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation
on

dispositive

motions

and

prisoner

petitions,

objections are made as follows:
The district judge to whom the case is
assigned shall make a de novo determination
upon the record, or after additional
evidence, of any portion of the magistrate
judge’s disposition to which specific
written
objection
has
been
made
in
accordance with this rule.
The district
2

where

judge may accept, reject, or modify the
recommendation decision, receive further
evidence, or recommit the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.
FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
No objections to the R&R were filed; and it appears to
this Court, upon review of Chief Magistrate Judge Zoss’s
findings and conclusions, that there are no grounds to reject
or modify them.
III.

CONCLUSION
As mentioned, the R&R recommends the pending motion be

denied as moot as this matter is now filed in federal court.
IT IS THEREFORE HEREBY ORDERED that this Court accepts
Chief

Magistrate

Judge

Zoss’s

Report

and

Recommendation

(Docket No. 10), and the motion for change of venue (Docket
No. 4) is denied as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of March, 2012.

__________________________________
Donald E. O’Brien, Senior Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa
No

3