Franklin v. Mansfield City School District et al

Filing 88

Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Defendant's 69 Motion for summary judgment and adopting the 87 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. The state claims are dismissed without prejudice. Judge John R. Adams on 11/18/15. (K,C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
Jumille Franklin,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Mansfield City School District et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:14CV1163
JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER
(Resolves Doc. 69)

Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Doc. 69. The
matter was fully briefed and referred to a Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation.
On October 30, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued his Report and recommended granting the
motion with respect to the federal claims and then declining to exercise jurisdiction over the
remaining state law claims. Doc. 87. No party has filed objections to the Report.
The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of
those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which the parties have made an objection. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Parties must file any objections to a Report and Recommendation within
fourteen days of service. Id. Failure to object within this time waives a party’s right to appeal the
magistrate judge’s recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
145 (1985);United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949–50 (6th Cir. 1981). Absent objection, a
district court may adopt the Magistrate’s report without review. See Thomas, 474 U.S. at 149.
Moreover, having conducted its own review of the parties’ briefs on the issue, the Court agrees
with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.

Consistent with the Report, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED
with respect to the federal claims asserted by Plaintiff Jumille Franklin. The Court declines to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. Accordingly, those state
law claims are hereby dismissed without prejudice. This matter is hereby closed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: November 18, 2015

/s/ John R. Adams_________________
Judge John R. Adams
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2