Richardson v. TI Automative Group Systems et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 12 - It is ordered that Defendant TI's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's initial complaint 8 be DENIED AS MOOT, Defendant TI's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's amended complaint 10 beGRANTE D, pro se Plaintiff's amended complaint 9 be DISMISSED and thiscase be TERMINATED on the Courts docket. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 11-21-2017. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Case No. 3:17-cv-226
TI AUTOMOTIVE GROUP
SYSTEMS, et al.,
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael J.
Newman (Doc. #12), 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 Recommendation. It is ordered
that (1) Defendant TI’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s initial complaint (doc. 8) be DENIED AS
MOOT; (2) Defendant TI’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended complaint (doc. 10) be
GRANTED; (3) pro se Plaintiff’s amended complaint (doc. 9) be DISMISSED ; and (4) this
case be TERMINATED on the Court’s docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: November 21, 2017
*s/Thomas M. Rose
Thomas M. Rose
United States District 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?