Gibson v. City of Cincinnati

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Mario Gibson,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:21cv292

City of Cincinnati, et al., Judge Michael R. Barrett

Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed by the Magistrate Judge on July 13, 2021 (Doc. 8). Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the R&R in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s R&R (Doc. 8) have been filed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 8) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge, the Complaint (Doc.6) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), with the exception of Plaintiff’s excessive-force cause of action against Defendant Crawford in his individual capacity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); and the Court DECLINES to exercise supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) over any state-law claims against dismissed Defendants City of Cincinnati, Hamilton County

1 Sheriff’s Office, Lt. Reed, Lt. Buchanan, and Jail Investigator High and DISMISS any such claims without prejudice. This Court certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that for the foregoing reasons an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith. See McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds, Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 203 (2007).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Michael R. Barrett Michael R. Barrett, Judge United States District Court