Hawkins #254254 v. Corizon Medical Inc.

Filing 29

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 28 ; Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint 10 is granted; Amended Complaint 11 shall be filed as of the date of this Order; Defendant Corizon Medical, Inc. is dismissed from this action; Corzon's Motion to Dismiss 17 is denied as moot; Plaintiff's Motion to Compel 13 is denied ; signed by Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker (Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker, ymc)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ROBERT EARL HAWKINS #254254, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 1:16-CV-890 v. HON. ROBERT J. JONKER CORIZON MEDICAL, INC., Defendant. / ORDER The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation filed by the United States Magistrate Judge in this action on June 14, 2017 (ECF No. 28). The Report and Recommendation was duly served on the parties. No objections have been filed under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C). ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 28) is approved and adopted as the opinion of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint (ECF No. 10) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s proposed amended complaint as to Keith Papendick, M.D. (ECF No. 11) shall be filed as of the date of this Order. A separate order regarding service of the amended complaint shall enter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Corizon Medical, Inc. be DISMISSED from this action, and that Corizon’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 17) be DENIED as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 13) is DENIED. An amended Case Management Order shall issue establishing discovery and pretrial motion deadlines with respect to Plaintiff’s claims against Dr. Papendick. Date: July 13, 2017 /s/ Robert J. Jonker ROBERT J. JONKER CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?