Martin v. Pickell et al

Filing 28

OPINION and ORDER Adopting 25 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION to Grant Defendant's Motion for Involuntary Dismissal 21 . Signed by District Judge Denise Page Hood. (LSau)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DANIEL MARTIN,
Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 16-13614
HON. DENISE PAGE HOOD

v.
SHERIFF ROBERT PICKELL, ET AL.,
Defendants.
/

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION [#25] TO GRANT DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL [#21]

I.

BACKGROUND
This matter is before the Court on a Report and Recommendation (Doc # 25)

filed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen to grant the Motion for Involuntary
Dismissal filed by Defendant Corizon (“Corizon”) (Doc # 21). To date, Plaintiff
Daniel Martin (“Martin”) has not filed objections to the Report and
Recommendation and the time to file such has passed. The Court ACCEPTS and
ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation, GRANTS Corizon’s Motion for
Involuntary Dismissal, DISMISSES Defendant Corizon from this action, and sua
sponte DISMISSES Defendant Robert Pickell (“Pickell”) from this action.

1

The background facts of this matter are adequately set forth in the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and the Court adopts them here.
II.

ANALYSIS
A.

Standard of Review

The standard of review by the district court when examining a Report and
Recommendation is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 636. This Court “shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or the specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which an objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The
court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id. In order to preserve the right
to appeal the magistrate judge’s recommendation, a party must file objections to
the Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days of service of the Report
and Recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failure to file specific objections
constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
155 (1985); Howard v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505, 508-09
(6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
The involuntary dismissal standard pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for
failure to prosecute is adequately set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, and the Court adopts it here.

2

After review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the
Court finds that his findings and conclusions are correct. The Court agrees with the
Magistrate Judge that Martin has willfully failed to comply with the requirements
of the Court, and has effectively abandoned his case.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s Report and
Recommendation (Doc # 25) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as this Court’s
findings of fact and conclusions of law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Corizon’s Motion for
Involuntary Dismissal (Doc # 21) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Corizon and Pickell are
DISMISSED with prejudice.
S/Denise Page Hood
Denise Page Hood
Chief Judge, United States District Court
Dated: August 31, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of
record on August 31, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
S/LaShawn R. Saulsberry
Case Manager

3