Johnson v. Doe et al

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 20 Report and Recommendation, 17 Motion to Dismiss filed by John Whetsel. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation and Dft Whetsel's Motion to Dismiss is Granted, as more fully set out. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 7/10/18. (jw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
LAMONE M. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICER JOHN DOE #1, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-17-1312-R

ORDER
Plaintiff filed this action alleging deprivation of her constitutional rights during her
detention in the Oklahoma County Jail. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), the
matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell for preliminary
review. On April 27, 2018, Judge Purcell issued a Report and Recommendation wherein
he recommended that the Motion to Dismiss by Defendant Whetsel be granted with
prejudice because the claims against him are barred by the statute of limitations. He further
recommended that the remaining Defendants, who have not been served, be dismissed on
the same grounds. On May 15, 2018, the Court sua sponte granted Plaintiff additional time
in which to objection to the Report and Recommendation, noting that Plaintiff had filed a
notice of change of address. The Court granted forty-five days from the date of the Order
to object, and therefore, Plaintiff’s objection was due not later than June 29, 2018. On June
8, 2018, the Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion to Appoint Counsel and provided her with
copies of documents she alleged she had not received. (Doc. No. 26). The Court did not
grant Plaintiff additional time in which to file her objection, nor has she filed any motion

requesting additional time in which to object, nor has Plaintiff filed an objection. In the
absence of a timely objection to the Report and Recommendation, there is no basis for
setting aside the Report and Recommendation of April 27, 2018, and the Court hereby
ADOPTS the same. Defendant Whetsel’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 20) is GRANTED
as Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations. The same holds true with regard
to those Defendants who have not been served, and thus dismissal of the claims against
them is appropriate as well.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of July 2018.

2