Matje v. Zestos et al
ORDER (1) Granting Defendant Gidel's 54 Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process and (2) Dismissing the Claims Against Defendant Gidel Without Prejudice. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case No. 13-cv-14791
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman
MR. ZESTOS, Medical Director,
ORDER (1) GRANTING DEFENDANT GIDEL’S MOTION
TO DISMISS FOR INSUFFICIENT SERVICE OF PROCESS (ECF #54)
AND (2) DISMISSING THE CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT GIDEL
Plaintiff Thomas L. Matje (“Matje”), an inmate in the custody of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons, has filed a pro se civil action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown
Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), against three defendants: James
Zestos (“Zestos”), Dr. William Malatinsky (“Malatinsky”) and S. Gidel (“Gidel”).
(See Compl. and Am. Compl., ECF ## 1, 17.) Before the Court now is Defendant
Gidel’s Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process (the “Motion”). (See
On July 30, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation recommending that the Court grant the Motion and dismiss
Matje’s claims against Gidel without prejudice (the “R&R”). (See ECF #59.) At
the conclusion of the R&R, the Magistrate Judge informed the parties that if they
wanted to seek review of his recommendation, they needed to file specific
objections with the Court within fourteen days. (See id. at Pg. ID 434-35.)
Matje has not filed any objections to the R&R. The failure to file objections
to an R&R waives any further right to appeal. See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and
Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers
Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to
an R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
Accordingly, because Matje has failed to file any objections to the R&R, IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to grant
the Motion is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that (1) Gidel’s Motion to Dismiss for
Insufficient Service of Process (ECF #54) is GRANTED and (2) the claims
against Gidel are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 21, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on August 21, 2017, by electronic means and/or
s/Holly A. Monda
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?