Garner v. Swagelok Company
Order Adopting 41 Report and Recommendation. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability (other related docs 28 , 29 , 33 , 42 , 43 ). Judge Donald C. Nugent 11/13/2017(C,KA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
ROMERO R. GARNER, SR,
CASE NO. 1:16CV182
JUDGE DONALD C. NUGENT
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND
This matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge William H. Baughman, Jr. (ECF #41), submitted on September 15, 2017. For reasons set
forth herein, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED by this Court.
Plaintiff, Romero R. Garner, Sr. (Hereafter “Mr. Garner”) brought this action against
Defendant, Swagelok Company (hereafter “Swagelok”), in January of 2016, alleging racial
discrimination in the workplace. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 405(g), and this matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Baughman, Jr., pursuant to
Local Rule 72.2.
Mr. Garner asks this Court to review the decision of Magistrate Judge Baughman, Jr.,
which ruled on Plaintiff’s motions as follows: (1) Swagelok’s Motion to Dismiss the Second
Amended Complaint (ECF #28) is GRANTED; (2) Mr. Garner’s Emergency Motion for
extension of discovery deadline (ECF #29) is MOOT, and (3) Mr. Garner’s Motion for Leave to
Amend Second Complaint (ECF #33) is without merit, and therefore, DENIED. In the Report
and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Baughman, Jr., found that Mr. Garner failed to establish
a prima facie case of employment discrimination. (ECF #41, pp. 6-7). Magistrate Judge
Baughman, Jr., indicates that Mr. Garner admitted in pleadings that he was fired while
essentially on probation from his job, in part for “running bad parts” and not performing standard
work. (ECF #41, p. 7). Therefore, Magistrate Judge Baughman, Jr., found that Mr. Garner failed
to state grounds on which relief may be granted, and recommended this Court dismiss Mr.
Garner’s Second Amended Complaint.1
Mr. Garner filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation, (ECF #42), and
Swagelok filed a Response to Plaintiff’s Objections on October 11, 2017 (ECF #43).
This Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of this case de novo, see
Massey v. City of Ferndale, 7 F.3d 506 (6th Cir. 1993), and has considered all of the pleadings,
affidavits, motions, and filings of the parties. After careful evaluation, this Court finds that
Magistrate Baughman, Jr.’s Report and Recommendation is thorough, well-written, wellsupported and correct. This Court, therefore, adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of law
of the Magistrate Judge as its own.
For the foregoing reasons, the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge
Baughman, Jr., is hereby ADOPTED.
This dismissal encompasses any and all state law claims Mr. Garner attempts to argue
separately from the federal employment discrimination claim.
Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this
decision could not be taken in good faith, and there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate
of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Donald C. Nugent
DONALD C. NUGENT
United States District Judge
DATED: November 13, 2017
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?