MCCURDY v. SMITH et al

Filing 23

ORDER adopting 18 Report and Recommended Decision for 12 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction filed by BETSY FITZGERALD, DONALD SMITH; granting 12 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; denying 20 Motion to Stay filed by MARK MCCURDY. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
MARK MCCURDY,
Plaintiff,
v.
DONALD SMITH, et al.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:13-cv-00277-JAW

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ORDER ON MOTION TO STAY
The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on December 31,
2013 his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 18). Mr. McCurdy filed his objections to
the Recommended Decision on January 16, 2014 (ECF No. 19) and the Defendants
filed their response to the objections on January 20, 2014 (ECF No. 22).

Mr.

McCurdy also moved to stay proceedings on January 16, 2014 (ECF No. 20); the
Defendants opposed that motion on January 20, 2014 (ECF No. 21).

I have

reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together
with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters
adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with
the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set
forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is
necessary. Furthermore, Mr. McCurdy’s assertion of “judicial economy” in support
of his motion to stay lacks merit.

1

1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the
Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.
2. It is further ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No.
12) be and hereby is GRANTED.
3. It is further ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay (ECF No. 20) be
and hereby is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.

/s/ John A. Woodcock, Jr.
JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR.
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 19th day of February, 2014

2