Harvey v. Jamsen

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

WAYNE LAMARR HARVEY, Case No. 23-10049

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

CHARLES JAMSEN, et al., Curtis Ivy United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. ____________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S DECEMBER 5, 2024 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 66)

Currently before the Court is Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy’s December 5, 2024 Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 66). Magistrate Judge Ivy recommends granting Defendant Bashir’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing the Jane Doe defendant because Plaintiff has failed to provide any identifying information. 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 Therefore, the court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendation (ECF No. 66), GRANTS Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 57), and DISMISSES the Jane Doe defendant. This is a final order and closes the case.

SO ORDERED. Date: January 17, 2024 s/F. Kay Behm F. Kay Behm United States District Judge