Coleman v. Corizon

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

RAYNARD D. COLEMAN, Case No. 21-13061

Plaintiff, F. Kay Behm v. United States District Judge

CORIZON, et al., Anthony P. Patti United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. ___________________________ /

OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S DECEMBER 12, 2024 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 76)

Currently before the court is Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti’s December 12, 2024 Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 76). Magistrate Judge Patti recommends dismissing this matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and deeming the pending dispositive motion moot. Id. The court is fully advised in the premises and has reviewed the record and the pleadings. Neither party has filed objections. “[T]he failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report[] releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter.” Hall v. Rawal, 2012 WL 3639070 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 24, 2012) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). The court nevertheless agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s recommended disposition. Accordingly, the court now ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s

Report and Recommendation, DISMISSES this matter pursuant to Rule 41(b), and DEEMS the pending dispositive motion MOOT. In accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation, the dismissal as to Corizon is WITHOUT PREJUDICE to

Plaintiff’s rights to pursue whatever remedies may be available in Bankruptcy Court, but is WITH PREJUDICE as to the remaining Defendants. This is a final order and closes the case.

SO ORDERED. Date: January 15, 2025 s/F. Kay Behm F. Kay Behm United States District Judge