Woollard v. Corizon Health Inc. et al

Filing 49

ORDER Adopting 41 Report and Recommendation DENYING AS MOOT 16 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Janet Campbell, 24 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Mary Grenier, Rosilyn Jindal, Corizon Health Inc., R. Coleman, 34 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Subrina Aikens, 20 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Richard Harbaugh - Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CORY WOOLLARD,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 18-cv-11529

Paul D. Borman
United States District Judge

v.

Anthony P. Patti
United States Magistrate Judge
CORIZON HEALTH, INC.,
RICHARD HARBAUGH, R.
COLEMAN, SUBRINA AIKENS,
MARY GRENIER, ROSILYN JINDAL
JANET CAMPBELL, et. al,
Defendants.
______________________________/
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (ECF #41); AND (2) DENYING AS MOOT FOUR
OF DEFENDANTS’ DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS (ECF #s 16, 20, 24, and 34)
Now before the Court is the November 19, 2018 Report and Recommendation
(ECF #41) of Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti recommending that the Court deny
as moot Defendants Campbell and Coleman’s August 27, 2018 Motion for Summary
Judgment (ECF #16), Defendant Harbaugh’s August 27, 2018 Motion for Summary
Judgment (ECF #20), Defendants Corizon Health, Inc. (“Corizon”), Coleman,
Greiner and Jindal’s September 4, 2018 Motion to Dismiss (ECF #24), and

Defendant Aikens’ October 17, 2018 Motion to Dismiss (ECF #34.) The Magistrate
Judge stated that he would address Defendant Corizon’s September 29, 2018 Motion
to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF #29) and Defendants Campbell and
Harbaugh’s October 1, 2018 Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #30) under
separate cover. No objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation.
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and there being no timely
objections 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 #41), and
DENIES AS MOOT Defendants’ Dispositive Motions listed above (ECF #s 16, 20,
24, and 34).
The Court notes that, on November 19, 2018 (the same day that the Report
and Recommendation was issued), Plaintiff filed a Motion to Hold in Abeyance the
Ruling on Defendant Harbaugh’s Motion for Summary Judgment, referring to ECF
Numbers 30, 34, and 39. (ECF #42.) The Magistrate Judge properly interpreted
Plaintiff’s Motion as a request to hold ECF Number 30 (Defendants Harbaugh and
Campbell’s October 1, 2018 Motion for Summary Judgment) in abeyance, as ECF
Number 34 is a motion by Defendant Aikens, and ECF Number 39 is Harbaugh’s
October 30, 2018 Reply in support of his October 1, 2018 Motion. The Magistrate
Judge granted Plaintiff’s request to hold its ruling on Defendants Harbaugh and
Campbell’s Motion (ECF #30) in abeyance until additional discovery was completed
2

to determine the proper party defendants.1 (ECF #43.) Therefore, Defendant Aikens’
October 17, 2018 Motion to Dismiss (ECF #34) remains denied as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 18, 2019

s/Paul D. Borman
Paul D. Borman
United States District Judge

1

The additional discovery has been completed, and Plaintiff filed a Motion for
Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint on December 27, 2018. (ECF #44.)
Defendants Aikens, Campbell and Harbaugh have filed their Objection (Jan. 7, 2019,
ECF #45), and Plaintiff has filed a Response (Feb. 7, 2019, ECF #47).
3