Miller v. Logan County Corporation, et al., et al

Filing 4

ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. It is RECOMMENDED that the Complaint be dismissed. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without prepayment offees or costs, ECF 1 , is GRANTED. Objections to Reportand Recommendation due within fourteen (14) days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King on 1/13/2015. (pes1) (This document has been sent by regular and certified mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification. 7009 2820 0003 5796 3218)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

ROSANNA L. MILLER,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:15-cv-077
Judge Sargus
Magistrate Judge King

v.

LOGAN COUNTY CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER and
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of
fees or costs, ECF 1, is GRANTED.

All judicial officers who render

services in this action shall do so as if the costs had been prepaid.
However, having performed the initial screen of the tendered Complaint
required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court concludes that the
Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

It

is therefore RECOMMENDED that the Complaint be dismissed.
The Complaint appears to assert a claim for a writ of mandamus to
require defendant Michael L. Brady, identified as the Probate and
Juvenile Court Judge for Logan County, Ohio, to produce “a Certified
copy of the Certificates of Oath of Office with Bond” as purportedly
required by Ohio law and the federal Freedom of Information Act, 5
U.S.C. § 552.1 Federal courts have no authority to issue writs of

1

The Complaint also names other individuals and entities, including an
insurance company, although the Complaint contains no allegations directed to
these defendants.

mandamus directing state officials to comply with state law.

Haggard

v. State of Tennessee, 421 F.2d 1384 (6th Cir. 1970). Moreover, the
federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, applies only to
federal agencies, see 5. U.S.C. §§ 552(f), 551(1), and has no
application to state agencies or officials.
It is therefore RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for
lack of jurisdiction or for failure to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted.

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report
and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file
and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation,
specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part
thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto.
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

28

Response to objections

must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy
thereof.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that the failure to object
to the Report and Recommendation will 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.

See, e.g., Pfahler v.

Nat’l Latex Prod. Co., 517 F.3d 816, 829 (6th Cir. 2007) (holding that
“failure

to

constituted

object
a

waiver

to

the

of

[the

magistrate
defendant’s]

judge’s
ability

recommendations
to

appeal

the

district court’s ruling”); United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976,
984 (6th Cir. 2005) (holding that defendant waived appeal of district

court’s

denial

magistrate

of

judge’s

pretrial
report

motion
and

by

failing

to

recommendation).

timely
Even

object

when

to

timely

objections are filed, appellate review of issues not raised in those
objections is waived.

Robert v. Tesson, 507 F.3d 981, 994 (6th Cir.

2007) (“[A] general objection to a magistrate judge’s report, which
fails

to

specify

the

issues

of

contention,

does

not

suffice

preserve an issue for appeal . . . .”) (citation omitted)).

s/ Norah McCann King___
Norah McCann King
United States Magistrate Judge
January 13, 2015

to