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)
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?