Peterson v. Pigg et al

Filing 26

OPINION AND ORDER Accepting and Adopting 24 Report and Recommendation, and Denying 25 Motion for Extension of Time, Signed by District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds. (WBar)

Case 2:20-cv-12635-NGE-EAS ECF No. 26, PageID.202 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TORAN PETERSON,
Case No. 20-12635
Plaintiff,
v.

Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds
Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford

PIGG and REAM,
Defendants.
/
ORDER AND OPINION ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
AUGUST 2, 2021 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [24] AND DENYING MOTION
FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS [25]
This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s August 2, 2021 Report
and Recommendation (ECF No. 24) and Plaintiff’s Motion for an Extension of Time to File
Objections (ECF No. 25). The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on the basis of Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust
his administrative remedies. (ECF No. 19.) None of the parties filed objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation within the time prescribed by the
Federal Rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). The Court has thoroughly reviewed the
record and the pleadings, including the Report and Recommendation.
On August 27, 2021, eleven days past the deadline to file objections, Plaintiff
moved the Court for a 45-day extension of time to file objections. (ECF No. 25.) Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) states: “When an act must be done within a specified time,

1

Case 2:20-cv-12635-NGE-EAS ECF No. 26, PageID.203 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 2

the court may, for good cause, extend the time . . . on motion made after the time has
expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B).
The Court does not find good cause to grant this extension for two reasons. First,
Plaintiff’s request is untimely, and he has failed to show excusable neglect. Second, the
Court fully agrees with the reasoning and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and
finds that any objection to the same would be meritless. The Court therefore DENIES
Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time, ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation, GRANTS Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, and
DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s complaint.
SO ORDERED.
s/Nancy G. Edmunds
Nancy G. Edmunds
United States District Judge
Dated: September 8, 2021

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of
record on September 8, 2021, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/William Barkholz for Lisa Bartlett
Case Manager

2