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)

Download PDF
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

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?