Whitmore v. Mallory et al
Filing
23
ORDER denying 17 Motion ; adopting Report and Recommendations re 19 Report and Recommendations.. Signed by Judge James L. Graham on 5/3/2017. (ds)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
Ricky Whitmore,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 2:15-cv-2838
Elmeaco Mallory, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the court for consideration of the April
18, 2017, report and recommendation issued by the magistrate judge,
recommending that plaintiff’s motion to reinstate his claims be
denied.
Cheryl
In his motion, plaintiff requests that his claims against
Mabry-Thomas,
the
Director
of
Opportunity Commission, be reinstated.
because
the
Sixth
Circuit
Court
of
the
Equal
Employment
Plaintiff argues that
Appeals
included
this
defendant’s name in the caption of its decision which dismissed his
appeal as untimely, that court must have concluded that he had
advanced a valid claim against her. The magistrate judge construed
the motion as one for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 60(b), and concluded that plaintiff failed to present grounds
for relief under Rule 60(b).
On May 2, 2017, plaintiff filed his
objections to the report and recommendation.
If a party objects within the allotted time to a report and
recommendation, the court “shall make a de novo determination of
those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1);
see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Upon review, the Court “may
accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations
made
by
the
magistrate
judge.”
28
U.S.C.
§636(b)(1).
The court agrees with the conclusion of the magistrate judge
that plaintiff has shown no grounds for relief under Rule 60(b).
The inclusion in the caption of the Sixth Circuit decision of the
names of all defendants plaintiff listed in his complaint was
simply a recounting of the parties plaintiff named in this action.
The Sixth Circuit dismissed plaintiff’s appeal as untimely, and did
not
address
the
merits
of
plaintiff’s
claims
in
any
way.
Plaintiff’s objections do not demonstrate that the magistrate
judge’s
recommendation
to
deny
relief
under
Rule
60(b)
was
erroneous.
The report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc.
19)
is
hereby
adopted
and
affirmed.
Plaintiff’s
motion
reinstate (Doc. 17) is denied.
Date: May 3, 2017
s/James L. Graham
James L. Graham
United States District Judge
2
to
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?