McBride et al v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al

Filing 164

ORDER Striking 162 Objection; Adopting 156 Report and Recommendation and 157 Report and Recommendation; Denying 135 Motion filed by Edward Burley; Denying 133 Motion filed by Edward Burley; and Denying 137 Motion for TRO filed by Edward Burley. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mary Ann McBride, et. al.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 15-11222

Michigan Department of Corrections,
et. al.,

Sean F. Cox
United States District Court Judge

Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER STRIKING BRANDON RESCH’S OBJECTIONS (ECF No. 162); ADOPTING
MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRAND’S MAY 26, 2020 REPORTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF Nos. 156 and 157); AND DENYING EDWARD BURLEY’S
MOTIONS (ECF Nos. 133, 135, and 137)
On March 29, 2019, the Court entered an order granting the parties’ joint motion for final
approval of class action settlement. (ECF No. 120). This order implemented a settlement
agreement that had been reached by the parties. Thereafter, Edward Burley (who purports to be a
class member) filed three pro se motions: (1) a motion for relief from judgment (ECF No. 133);
(2) a motion to enforce compliance with the Settlement Agreement (ECF No. 135); and (3) a
motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 137).
On January 9, 2020, the Court referred Burley’s motions to Magistrate Judge David R.
Grand. (ECF No. 147). On May 26, 2020, Judge Grand issued two Reports and Recommendations,
wherein he recommends that the Court deny Burley’s three pending motions. (ECF Nos. 156 and
157).

1

The time permitted to file objections has passed and Burley has not objected to Judge
Grand’s recommended dispositions of his motions. Typically, that would resolve these motions.
However, another purported class member, Brandon Resch, has objected to one of Judge Grand’s
Reports and Recommendations. (ECF No. 162). Resch acknowledges that Burley’s motions are
“outside of [his] purview,” and that he and Burley “have not talked nor corresponded in any
manner whatsoever with one another to date.” (ECF No. 162, PageID 4823-4824). Nonetheless,
Resch asks the Court to disregard Judge Grand’s recommended disposition of one of Burley’s
motions.
Resch has no authority to object on Burley’s behalf. Accordingly, the Court STRIKES
Resch’s objections. (ECF No. 162).
Because Burley has not filed any objection within the time permitted for objections, the
Court ADOPTS Judge Grand’s Reports and Recommendations. (ECF Nos. 156 and 157).
Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion for relief from judgment (ECF No. 133); DENIES
the motion to enforce compliance with settlement agreement (ECF No. 135); and DENIES the
motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 137).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
United States District Judge
Dated: July 6, 2020 

2