Sango #252200 v. Ault et al

Filing 134

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 132 ; granting motion to dismiss 130 ; dismissing complaint; signed by District Judge Paul L. Maloney (Judge Paul L. Maloney, acr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT D. SANGO,
Plaintiff,
Case No.: 1:14-cv-345
v.
HONORABLE PAUL L. MALONEY

R. AULT, et al.,
Defendants.
/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation filed by United States Magistrate
Judge Phillip J. Green in this action (ECF No. 132). The Report and Recommendation mailed to the
Plaintiff was returned to the Court marked “not deliverable as addressed - unable to forward”.
Even though the Plaintiff has not received a copy of the Report and Recommendation,
Plaintiff has been properly served under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As required by
statute, the magistrate judge filed the Report and Recommendation with the Court and mailed a copy
to the Plaintiff at his last known address. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“the magistrate judge shall
file his proposed findings and recommendations under subparagraph (B) with the court and a copy
shall forthwith be mailed to all parties.”). Upon placing the Report and Recommendation in the mail
to the Plaintiff's last known address, service was complete. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C). Plaintiff has
a continuing obligation to apprise the Court of his current address. See W.D. Mich. L.Civ.R. 41.1
(“Failure of a plaintiff to keep the Court apprised of his current address shall be grounds for
dismissal for want of prosecution.”).

After being served with a Report and Recommendation issued by a magistrate judge, a party
has fourteen days to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir.
2005). Failure to file an objection results in a waiver of the issue and the issue cannot be appealed.
Id. See also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985) (upholding the Sixth Circuit's practice). No
objections have been filed to date.
Although the Plaintiff's failure to file objections is a sufficient reason to adopt the Report and
Recommendation, this Court has reviewed the merits of the report and finds the magistrate judge's
reasoning and conclusions sound.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1.

The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 132) is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion;

2.

The plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED for the reasons stated in the Report and

Recommendation.
This action is terminated.

Dated: August 28, 2017

/s/ Paul L. Maloney
Paul L. Maloney
United States District Judge

2