Rajapakse v. Credit Acceptance Corporation et al

Filing 138

ORDER (1) Denying Plaintiff's 137 Motion to Stay and (2) Directing Plaintiff to Inform the Court if She Wishes to File Separate Objections to the 136 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION SAMANTHA RAJAPAKSE, Plaintiff, Case No. 17-cv-12970 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORP., Defendant. __________________________________________________________________/ ORDER (1) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STAY (ECF #137) AND (2) DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO INFORM THE COURT IF SHE WISHES TO FILE SEPARATE OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #136) On January 30, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation (the “R&R”) with respect to the following pending motions in this action: (1) Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF #123), (2) Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF #119), (3) Plaintiff’s motion to expedite the return of her vehicle (ECF #127), (4) Plaintiff’s motion to compel the return of her vehicle (ECF #129), and a motion to amend her motion for summary judgment (ECF #134). (See R&R, ECF #137.) On January 31, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for an “immediate stay of all proceedings” (the “Stay Motion”). (See ECF #137.) The Stay Motion includes several attacks on the Magistrate Judge. The attacks on the Magistrate Judge are 1 wholly without merit. In addition, the Stay Motion provides no basis, whatsoever, for the requested stay of proceedings. Accordingly, the Stay Motion (ECF #137) is DENIED. The Court notes that the Stay Motion does appear to include some criticisms of the legal conclusions reached in the R&R. It is not clear, however, whether Plaintiff intended to include her objections to the R&R in the Stay Motion or if Plaintiff intends to file her objections to the R&R in a separate document. Therefore, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to inform the Court, in writing, by no later than February 8, 2019, whether (1) she would like the Court to consider the legal objections to the R&R included in the Stay Motion to constitute her objections to the R&R or (2) she intends to file a separate document that will include all of her legal objections to the R&R. If Plaintiff intends to file a separate document that includes all of her legal objections to the R&R, that document shall be filed with the Court no later than February 13, 2019. IT IS SO ORDERED s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: February 1, 2019 2 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on February 1, 2019, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Monda Case Manager (810) 341-9764 3

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?