Wood v. Mohr et al

Filing 46

ORDER ADOPTING the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 40 38 in that the 21 Motion to Dismiss filed by John Gardner is DENIED and the 22 Motion to Dismiss filed by Mona Parks is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Gregory L Frost on 8/27/13. (sem1)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION TYRAN WOOD, Plaintiff, Case No. 2:12-cv-978 JUDGE GREGORY L. FROST Magistrate Judge Mark R. Abel v. GARY MOHR, et al., Defendants. ORDER This matter is before the Court for consideration of the Magistrate Judge’s July 29, 2013 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 38) and July 30, 2013 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 40). In the former filing, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant the April 24, 2013 motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Mona Parks. (ECF No. 22.) In the latter filing, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court deny the April 24, 2013 motion to dismiss filed by Defendant John Gardner. (ECF No. 21.) Each Report and Recommendation advised the parties that the failure to object within fourteen days of that respective filing would “result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court.” (ECF No. 38, at Page ID # 236; ECF No. 40, at Page ID # 242.) The Court has reviewed each Report and Recommendation. Noting that no objections have been filed, that the time for filing such objections has expired, and that the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning is correct, the Court ADOPTS both the July 29, 2013 Report and 1 Recommendation (ECF No. 38) and the July 30, 2013 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 40). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the April 24, 2013 motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Mona Parks (ECF No. 22) and DENIES the April 24, 2013 motion to dismiss filed by Defendant John Gardner (ECF No. 21). IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Gregory L. Frost GREGORY L. FROST 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?