Williams v. Cooper
Filing
19
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 18 ). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 11/10/2015. (mr)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
ERIKA WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
EBB COOPER,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 1:15-cv-152
Judge Timothy S. Black
Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz
DECISION AND ENTRY
ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 18)
This case 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 Karen L. Litkovitz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate
Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court, and, on October 21, 2015, submitted a
Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 18). Plaintiff did not file any objections.
As required by 29 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), 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 Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby ADOPTED
in its entirety.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons:
1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 17) is
DENIED;
2. Plaintiff is advised as follows:
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4), plaintiff may file, within thirty (30)
days after service of any Order adopting the Report and Recommendation,
a motion with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed as a
pauper on appeal. Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir.
1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal Service, 105 F.3d
274 (6th Cir. 1997). Plaintiff’s motion must include a copy of the affidavit
filed in the District Court and the District Court’s statement of the reasons
for denying pauper status on appeal. Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).
Plaintiff is notified that if she does not file a motion within thirty (30) days
of receiving notice of the District Court’s decision as required by Fed. R.
App. P. 24(a)(5), or fails to pay the required filing fee of $505.00 within
this same time period, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Callihan, 178 F.3d at 804. Once dismissed for want of prosecution, the
appeal will not be reinstated, even if the filing fee or motion for pauper
status is subsequently tendered, unless plaintiff can demonstrate that she
did not receive notice of the District Court’s decision within the time period
prescribed for by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). Id.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: 11/10/15
s/ Timothy S. Black
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge
2
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?