Chapman v. Mohr et al

Filing 9

ORDER adopting the Report and Recommendation (Doc 4). Accordingly, plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice on the ground that plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) that an appeal of any Order adopting the Report and Recommendation will not be taken in good faith and therefore DENIES plaintiff leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Plaintiff remains free to apply to proceed informa paupris in the Court of Appeals. Signed by Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott on 7/29/13. (mtw) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/29/2013: # 1 Certified Mail Receipt) (mtw).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

Maurice Chapman, Sr.,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
Gary Mohr, et al.,
Defendant(s).

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Case Number: 1:13cv331
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott

ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States
Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge
reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on June 11, 2013 a Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 4). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a letter/objections to such Report
and Recommendation (Doc. 7).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and
considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the
Court does determine that such Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice on the ground that
plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) that an appeal of any Order adopting
the Report and Recommendation will not be taken in good faith and therefore DENIES plaintiff
leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Plaintiff remains free to apply to proceed in forma paupris in
the Court of Appeals. See Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir. 1999), overruling in

part Floyd v. United States Postal Serv., 105 F.3d 274, 277 (6th Cir. 1997).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

___s/Susan J. Dlott___________
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott
United States District Court