Williams v. Kasich et al

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 15 Motion for Certificate of Appealability filed by Melody Williams, 17 Report and Recommendations, 16 Motion for Reconsideration filed by Melody Williams, - It is ORDERED that Petitioner' ;s Motion for Reconsideration 16 is DENIED. Petitioner is DENIED any requested certificate of appealability and the Court hereby certifies to the United States Court of Appeals that an appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 10-27-2015. (de)(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 WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON MELODY WILLIAMS, Petitioner, : Case No. 3:15-cv-254 -vsDistrict Judge Thomas M. Rose Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz GOVERNOR JOHN KASICH, et al., Respondents. : ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (ECF No. 17), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 16) is DENIED. Petitioner is DENIED any requested certificate of appealability and the Court hereby certifies to the United States Court of Appeals that an appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. October 27th 2015. *s/Thomas M. Rose Thomas M. Rose United States District Judge 1

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?