Hadix v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al

Filing 30

ORDER Adopting 29 Report and Recommendation Denying 20 Motion to Stay filed by William Hadix, Granting 28 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Roberson, Granting 14 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by House, Springer-Hill, Michigan Department of Corrections, Linda Beckwith Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
WILLIAM HADIX,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 16-10173
Paul D. Borman
United States District Judge

v.

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, ET AL.,

Mona K. Majzoub
United States Magistrate Judge

Defendants.
______________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER: (1) ADOPTING
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 29);
(2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NOS. 14 & 28); (3) DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STAY (ECF NO. 20);
AND (4) DISMISSING THIS ACTION WITH PREJUDICE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub’s Report and Recommendation
recommending that the Court grant Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 14
& 28) and DENY Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay (ECF No. 20). Plaintiff did not file an objection to
the Report and Recommendation.1
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and there being no timely objections

1

The Court acknowledges that the Report and Recommendation erroneously states that
Defendant Joel Robinson was not served with the Complaint. (Report and Recommendation, at
1 n. 2.) The Court finds this statement is merely a clerical error, as the Magistrate Judge makes
clear later in the Report and Recommendation that Defendant Robinson was served on
September 28, 2016. (Report and Recommendation, at 4.) The Court also acknowledges that the
Report and Recommendation was filed less than 21 days after Defendant Robinson filed his
Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, however, has neither filed a response to Defendant
Robinson’s Motion for Summary Judgment, nor filed an objection to the Report and
Recommendation.

from either party under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L.R. 72.1(b), the Court ADOPTS
the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 29); GRANTS Defendants
Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 14 & 28); DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay (ECF
No. 20); DECLINES supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s remaining state law claims
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) and DISMISSES the Complaint with PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Paul D. Borman
PAUL D. BORMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: December 8, 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 8, 2016.

s/Deborah Tofil
Case Manager

2

3