Thomas v. Erdos et al
Filing
13
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 11 ). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 12/5/2016. (mr)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
JONATHAN T. THOMAS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
RON ERDOS, et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 1:16-cv-793
Judge Timothy S. Black
Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz
DECISION AND ENTRY
ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 11)
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 November 2, 2016, submitted
a Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 11). No objections were filed.
As required by 28 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 Recommendations should be and is hereby adopted in its
entirety.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s First Amendment, right to petition the government/access
the courts claims against Defendants Noland, Oppy, Mahlman, Erdos, Miller, and the
Chief Inspector; and Plaintiff’s claim regarding the loss of his personal property against
Dawson; and his Eighth Amendment claims against Holbrook are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: 12/5/16
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?