Varley et al v. Sarky
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 4 ). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 1/3/2017. (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
MARK VARLEY, et al.,
NICHOLAS EDWARD SARKY,
Case No. 1:16-cv-1016
Judge Timothy S. Black
Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman
DECISION AND ENTRY
ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 4)
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 Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the
Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on December 2, 2016,
submitted a Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 4). 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
1. Plaintiff Myra Varley’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED
and the conditional grant of Plaintiff Mark Varley’s application to proceed in
forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is REVOKED and DENIED;
2. Plaintiffs’ complaint (Doc. 3) is DISMISSED for failure to pay the requisite
filing fee, failure to timely submit a properly completed application to proceed
in forma pauperis, lack of jurisdiction, and failure to prosecute; and
3. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, whereupon this case is
TERMINATED on the docket of this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge
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?