Tocarchick v. UAW Region 1 et al

Filing 12

ORDER Adopting 11 Report and Recommendation, Granting Defendant UAW Region 1's 4 Motion to Dismiss, and Dismissing Plaintif's 1 Complaint. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
SUSAN TOCARCHICK,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 15-cv-11329
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
UAW REGION 1 et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #11),
GRANTING DEFENDANT UAW REGION 1’S MOTION TO DISMISS
(ECF #4), AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT (ECF #1)
On January 22, 2015, Plaintiff Susan Tocarchick (“Tocarchick”) filed a pro
se Complaint in the Macomb County Circuit Court against Defendant UAW
Region 1 and four other Defendants (the “Complaint”). (See ECF #1 at 8-23, Pg.
ID 8-23.) It appears that UAW Region 1 is the only Defendant Tocarchick served
with the Complaint.

(See id. at 2, Pg. ID 2.)

UAW Region 1 removed

Tocarchick’s action to this Court (see ECF #1), and it moved to dismiss the claims
Tocarchick brought against it (the “Motion to Dismiss”). (See ECF #4.)
On July 30, 2015, Magistrate Judge David Grand issued a Report and
Recommendation in which he recommended that the Court (1) grant the Motion to
Dismiss and (2) dismiss Tocarchick’s claims against all of the Defendants. (See
ECF #11.) The R&R stated that the parties could seek review of the
1

recommendation if they filed “specific written objections” within fourteen days.
(See id. at 9-10, Pg. ID 179-180.)
Neither party has objected to the R&R.

Failure to file objections to the

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); see also Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers
Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to
the R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has nevertheless reviewed
the R&R and agrees with the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's July 30,
2015, Report and Recommendation (ECF #11) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of
this Court; that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF #4) is GRANTED; and that
Tocarchick’s Complaint (ECF #1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: August 21, 2015
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on August 21, 2015, by electronic means and/or
ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]
2