Howard v. Full Service Partnership et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,DISMISSING CASE,DENYING SUBSEQUENT MOTIONS AS MOOT, AND CERTIFYING THAT APPEAL NOT TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH 7 8 9 10 . Signed by Judge J. Daniel Breen on 1/3/2025. (gkp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN DIVISION
WILLIAM SCOTT HOWARD,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
FULL SERVICE PARTNERSHIP,
MENTAL HEALTH AGENCIES,
ORGANIZATION TENNESSEE/
UNNAMED DEFENDANTS 1-100.
Defendants.

Case No. 1:24-cv-01221-JDB-jay

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,
DISMISSING CASE,
DENYING SUBSEQUENT MOTIONS AS MOOT, AND
CERTIFYING THAT APPEAL NOT TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH

Before the Court is the complaint filed by Plaintiff, William Scott Howard, proceeding pro
se. By Administrative Order, this matter was referred to the United States magistrate judge for
management of all pretrial matters and for determination and/or report and recommendation.
Admin. Order 2013-05. Magistrate Judge Jon A. York conducted a screening review of the
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis.
(Docket Entry (“D.E.”) 7 at PageID 13.)

After reviewing the allegations, Judge York

recommended dismissal. (Id. at PageID 14) At the end of the Report and Recommendation, the
Magistrate Judge notified Howard that if he disagreed with the recommendation, he was required
to file an objection within 14 days. (Id.) Judge York added that “failure to file [an objection]

1

within fourteen (14) days may constitute a waiver and/or forfeiture of objections, exceptions, and
any further appeal.” (Id. (emphasis omitted)).
Plaintiff did not object to the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation before the
time for doing so expired.

Howard, thus, forfeited his objections to the report and

recommendation. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520, 530 (6th Cir. 2019) (quoting Kensu v.
Haigh, 87 F.3d 172, 176 (6th Cir. 1996)).

Upon review of the record, the report and

recommendation is ADOPTED and the action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is
DIRECTED to enter judgment.
As a result, of the dismissal, Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel (D.E. 8), motion for
damages (D.E. 9), and motion requesting case management conference (D.E. 10) are DENIED as
moot.
Section 1915(a)(3) provides that an appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial
court certifies in writing that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The good faith standard
is an objective one. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). An appeal is not taken
in good faith if the issue presented is frivolous. Id. The same considerations that lead this Court
to issue the instant ruling also compel it to conclude that an appeal by Plaintiff would not be taken
in good faith. It is therefore CERTIFIED, pursuant to § 1915(A)(3), that any appeal of this order
would not be taken in good faith and that Plaintiff may not proceed on appeal in forma pauperis.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of January 2025.
s/ J. DANIEL BREEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2