Rogers v. Michigan Attorney General et al
ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation for 8 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SPin)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SAMUEL C. ROGERS,
Case Number 16-12509
Honorable David M. Lawson
Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis
MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL,
MICHIGAN TENURE COMMISSION,
and MICHIGAN FRIEND OF THE COURTS,
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Presently before the Court is the report issued on December 1, 2016 by Magistrate Judge
Stephanie Dawkins Davis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), recommending that the Court dismiss the
plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice. Although the report stated that the parties to this action
could object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report,
no objections have been filed thus far. The parties’ failure to file objections to the report and
recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231,
829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report
releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [dkt.
#8] is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
s/David M. Lawson
DAVID M. LAWSON
United States District Judge
Dated: December 21, 2016
PROOF 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 21, 2016.
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?