Edwards v. Prasad et al
Filing
62
ORDER Adopting 61 Report and Recommendation, Granting 40 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Prison Health Service, Anil Prasad, Granting 46 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Ghulam Dastgir Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
WILLIE EDWARDS # 193507,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 15-cv-11424
Paul D. Borman
United States District Judge
ANIL PRASAD, M.D.,
GHULAM DASTGIR, M.D.,
and PRISON HEALTH SERVICE,
a/k/a CORIZON HEALTH, INC.,
Defendants.
________________________/
Patricia T. Morris
United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE MORRIS’S OCTOBER 31, 2016
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 61),
(2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS CORIZON HEALTH, INC., AND DR. ANIL
PRASAD’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 40),
(3) GRANTING DEFENDANT GHULAM DASTGIR, MD’S JOINDER AND
CONCURRENCE IN DEFENDANTS CORIZON HEALTH, INC. AND
DR. ANIL PRASAD’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 46), AND
(4) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE
On October 31, 2016, Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris issued a Report and
Recommendation to grant Defendants’ Corizon Health, Inc. And Dr. Anil Prasad’s Motion
for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 40) and to grant Defendant Ghulam Dastgir, MD’s joinder
in that Motion (ECF No. 46). Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and there
being no timely objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L.R. 72.1(d), the
Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation, GRANTS Defendants’ Motions to
Dismiss (ECF Nos. 40 and 46), and DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Complaint WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Paul D. Borman
PAUL D. BORMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: December 6, 2016
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney
or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on December 6, 2016.
s/Deborah Tofil
Case Manager
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?