Hill v. Nolan et al

Filing 8

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 4 ; dismissing plaintiff's complaint; denying petitioner leave to appeal IFP. Signed by Judge Sandra S Beckwith on 12/21/15. (mb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Gregory Hill, Plaintiff v. Case No. 1:15-cv-648 Arleen Nolan, et al., Defendants ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation filed October 8, 2015 (Doc. 4). Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). As of the date of this Order, no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation have been filed. Having reviewed this matter de novo pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, we find the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation correct. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice. This Court certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore DENIES petitioner leave to appeal in forma pauperis. See Callahan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir. 1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal Serv., 105 F.3rd 274, 277 (6th Cir. 1997). Date: December 21, 2015 s/Sandra S. Beckwith Sandra S. Beckwith, Senior Judge United States District Court

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?