Jimenez v. Fidelity

Filing 5

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) is DENIED as MOOT. Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 6/6/17. (gs) (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 ANTHONY LOLIN JIMENEZ, SR., Plaintiff, vs. FIDELITY ADVISOR, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : Case No. 1:17-cv-197 Judge Timothy S. Black Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 2) 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 April 14, 2017, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 2). Specifically, Magistrate Judge Litkovitz recommended that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that Plaintiff be ordered to pay the full $400.00 filing fee within thirty days. (Doc. 2). Subsequently, Plaintiff paid the $400.00 filing fee. (Doc. 4). 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 Recommendation (Doc. 2) should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) is DENIED as MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. 6/6/17 Date: ___________ 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?