Farnsworth et al v. Johnson
Filing
61
ORDER Adopting 56 Report and Recommendation, Granting 47 Motion to Dismiss filed by Carey Johnson and Dismissing Plaintiff Williams's claims with prejudice Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)
Case 2:17-cv-10966-RHC-RSW ECF No. 61 filed 04/30/20
PageID.291
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
BRANDON FARNSWORTH AND
TYRONE WILLIAMS,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CASE NO: 17-CV-10966
CAREY JOHNSON,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter was referred to United States Magistrate R. Steven Whalen pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.1. In his report filed on March 30, 2020, the
magistrate judge recommended that this court grant Defendant Johnson’s [ Dkt #47] motion
to dismiss Plaintiff Williams claims against her with prejudice. No objections have been filed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 636(b)(1)(C), thus further appeal rights are waived.1
The court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation for purposes of this Order.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation Defendant Johnson’s [Dkt #47] Motion to Dismiss Tyrone
Williams’s Claims against her is GRANTED and the claims are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
S/Robert H. Cleland
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: April 30, 2020
1
The failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the court from its duty to
independently review the motion. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
Case 2:17-cv-10966-RHC-RSW ECF No. 61 filed 04/30/20
PageID.292
Page 2 of 2
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or
pro se parties on this date, April 30, 2020, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
S/Lisa Wagner
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
(810) 292-6522
.
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?