Bryant v. Perry et al.

Filing 7

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court recommends that Plaintiff be assessed the full filing fee and that this case be dismissed for want of prosecution if Plaintiff does not pay the full fee within thirty days. Objections to R&R due by 3/15/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terence P. Kemp on 3/1/17. (ew)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Shaun A. Bryant, : Plaintiff, v. : Case No. 2:16-cv-1190 : Major Perry, et al., : CHIEF JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. Magistrate Judge Kemp Defendant. : REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Shaun A. Bryant was a state prisoner housed at the Franklin County Corrections Center when he filed his complaint on December 21, 2016. By order dated January 6, 2017, the Court directed Mr. Bryant to submit, within 30 days of the date of that order, a certified account statement from the prison cashier which indicated both the average monthly balance in his account for the last six months and the amount of income credited to his account during those months. Mr. Bryant has not submitted the statement. Under this circumstance, the Court recommends that Mr. Bryant be assessed the full filing fee. McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 605 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). The Court further recommends that this case be dismissed for want of prosecution if Mr. Bryant does not pay the full fee within thirty days. PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those specific proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with supporting authority for the objection(s). A judge of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. Upon proper objections, a judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive further evidence or may recommit this matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. ยง636(b)(1). The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the district judge review the Report and Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). /s/ Terence P. Kemp United States Magistrate 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?