Nettles v. Bruno et al

Filing 9

Opinion and Order Adopting 7 Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Plaintiff's 1 Complaint in Part. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (KWin)

Download PDF
Case 1:22-cv-10535-TLL-PTM ECF No. 9, PageID.32 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION JONATHAN NETTLES, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:22-cv-10535 Honorable Thomas L. Ludington United States District Judge TAMMY BRUNO, et al., Defendants. ______________________________________/ Honorable Patricia T. Morris United States Magistrate Judge OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT IN PART This matter is before this Court on Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) to sua sponte dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint in part. ECF No. 7. Although the R&R states that Plaintiff could object to and seek review of the recommendation within 14 days of service, Plaintiff has not done so. He has therefore waived his right to appeal Judge Morris’s findings. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Morris’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 7, is ADOPTED. Further, it is ORDERED that (1) Plaintiff’s claims against the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services/CPS; (2) Plaintiff’s official-capacity claims against Tammy Bruno and Melissa Johnson; (3) Plaintiff’s equal-protection claims against any Defendant; and (4) Plaintiff’s Franks, false-arrest, and malicious-prosecution claims, except to the extent that these claims are premised on a civil conspiracy, are DISMISSED. This is not a final order and does not close the case. Case 1:22-cv-10535-TLL-PTM ECF No. 9, PageID.33 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 2 Dated: August 2, 2022 s/Thomas L. Ludington THOMAS L. LUDINGTON United States District Judge -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?