Larson v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al

Filing 19

ORDER Accepting Report and Recommendation 17 and Dismissing Action. Signed by District Judge Denise Page Hood. (LSau)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
THOMAS LARSON,
Plaintiff,
V.

Case No. 18-10857
Hon. Denise Page Hood

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING ACTION
This matter comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford’s
Report and Recommendation. [Dkt. No. 17]
Pro se Plaintiff Thomas Larson filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
against Defendants Michigan Department of Corrections (“MDOC”), Corizon
Corporation, and a number of individual defendants. On June 5, 2018, all Defendants
except the MDOC were dismissed. [Dkt. No. 7] On August 8, 2018, the MDOC filed
a Motion for Summary Judgment. [Dkt. No. 10], to which Plaintiff responded.
The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant the MDOC’s Motion
for Summary Judgment.

The Magistrate Judge concluded that: (1) Plaintiff’s

allegation of failure to properly treat his medical conditions is not cognizable under

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), (2) Plaintiff does not
sufficiently identify any necessary treatment as being withheld, such that he could
establish a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights arising from conditions of his
confinement, and (3) Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for retaliation under Article
V of the ADA.
No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed by either party,
but on February 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Motion to Dismiss this
Case in its Entirety.” [Dkt. No. 18] The title “Motion to Dismiss this Case in its
Entirety” is the sum of the document; it does not contain any text or argument in
support of its title.
The Court has had an opportunity to review this matter and finds that the
Magistrate Judge reached the correct conclusions for the proper reasons. Finding no
error in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the Court adopts the
Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Furthermore, as neither party has raised
an objection to the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that the parties have
waived any further objections to the Report and Recommendation. Smith v. Detroit
Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987) (a party’s failure
to file any objections waives his or her right to further appeal); Thomas v. Arn, 474
U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
2

For the reasons stated above,
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [Docket No. 17, filed
February 3, 2019] is ADOPTED as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of
law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the MDOC’s Motion for Summary
Judgment [Docket No. 10, filed August 8, 2018] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. NO. 18,
filed February 14, 2019] is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS ORDERED.
s/Denise Page Hood
DENISE PAGE HOOD
United States District Judge

DATED: March 27, 2019

3