Easterling v. Donovan
Filing
7
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 3 MOTION to Stay filed by Warren Easterling Objections to R&R due by 6/25/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/6/2015. (ead)(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
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
WARREN EASTERLING,
:
Case No. 3:14-cv-217
Petitioner,
District Judge Walter Herbert Rice
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
-vsJUDGE MARY DONOVAN, et al., ,
Respondents.
:
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This case is before the Court sua sponte. On July 8, 2014, the Court entered a notation
order denying Petitioner’s Motion to Stay which was filed very shortly after the Complaint and
noting that Petitioner had neither paid the filing fee nor been given permission to proceed in
forma pauperis. The case came back to the Magistrate Judge’s attention because the Clerk filed
a copy of Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment in Case No. 3:14-cv-130 in this case.
On March 1, 2015, the Magistrate Judge denied Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to Proceed
in forma pauperis as moot (Notation Order). Petitioner has never objected nor paid the filing
fee.
Accordingly it is respectfully recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice
for want of prosecution.
June 6, 2015.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge
1
NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the
proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this Report
and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is extended to seventeen
days because this Report is being served by one of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ.
P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F). Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected
to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report
and Recommendations are based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral
hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such
portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the
assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party=s objections
within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in
accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See United States v. Walters, 638
F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 (1985).
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?