Altantawi v. Bouchard

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

MUHAMMAD ALTANTAWI,

Plaintiff, Case No. 22-CV-11906

vs. HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH

MICHAEL J. BOUCHARD, et al.,

Defendant. ____________________/

ORDER REGARDING OBJECTIONS AND DEADLINES

On February 6, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R). (Dkt. 60). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) and Local Rule 72.1(d), Plaintiff’s objections, if any, were due by February 20, 2025. On February 25, 2025, having received no objections, the Court entered an order accepting the Report and Recommendation (R&R). (Dkt. 61). Later that same day, the Court received Plaintiff’s objections to the R&R in the U.S. Mail. (Dkt. 62). The post-mark on the envelope containing Plaintiff’s objections indicates he mailed them on February 18, 2025. Under the prisoner mailbox rule, the objection is “filed” when the prisoner places it in the mail. 1 See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 274 (1988). Plaintiff’s objections are, therefore, timely filed. The Court will reconsider its decision to adopt the R&R in light of the objections. Any response to the Objections must be filed on or before March 11, 2025. SO ORDERED.

1 In the Sixth Circuit, the prisoner mailbox rule allows prisoners who are not represented by counsel and are proceeding pro se with this additional time, “to prevent pro se prisoners from being penalized by any delays in filing caused by the prison mail system.” See Cretacci v Call, 988 F.3d 860, 867 (6th Cir. 2021). s/Mark A. Goldsmith_______ Dated: March 3, 2025 HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH Detroit, Michigan UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE