Klosterman v. Sedamsville Community Development Corp.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

JOHN KLOSTERMAN,

Plaintiff, Case No. 1:20-cv-119 v. JUDGE DOUGLAS R. COLE Magistrate Judge Bowman SEDAMSVILLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUP, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER This cause comes before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s July 16, 2020, Report and Recommendation (“R. & R.”) (Doc. 63). The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court DENY the Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction in this matter. (Doc. 5). The R. & R. advised both parties that a failure to object within the 14 days specified by the R. & R. may result in forfeiture of rights on appeal, which includes the right to District Court review. (See Doc. 14, #101). See also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 152 (1985) (“There is no indication that Congress, in enacting § 636(b)(1)(C), intended to require a district judge to review a magistrate’s report to which no objections are filed.”); Berkshire v. Beauvais, 928 F.3d 520, 530 (6th Cir. 2019) (noting “fail[ure] to file an objection to the magistrate judge’s R & R … is forfeiture, not waiver”) (emphasis in original); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The time for filing objections has passed and none have been filed. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and DENIES the Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 5). SO ORDERED.

August 14, 2020 DATE DOUGLAS R. COLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE