Johnson v. Johnson

Filing 20

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 14 Report and Recommendation.. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 9/27/2017. (mb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JOSHUA JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOSHUA JOHNSON,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-17-560-D

ORDER
This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation issued
by United States Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)
and (C).

Judge Purcell recommends upon initial screening of the Complaint and the

Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A(b), that this civil
rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.
The Court acting sua sponte on August 22, 2017, granted an extension of time until
September 11, 2017, for Plaintiff to file an objection. To date, Plaintiff has neither filed
a timely objection nor requested additional time to object, although he was expressly
advised of his right to object and was given notice of the waiver rule.

Under the

circumstances shown by the case record, the Court finds that Plaintiff has waived further
judicial review. See Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991); see also
United States v. 2121 East 30th Street, 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996). Further, for

the reasons fully explained by Judge Purcell, the Court finds that a dismissal of the action
upon filing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A(b) is warranted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [Doc.
No. 14] is ADOPTED in its entirety. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice to a
future filing, and the dismissal shall count as one “prior occasion” or “strike” pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). A separate judgment of dismissal shall be entered.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 27th day of September, 2017.

2