Mincey v. The State of Ohio

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Jatone D. Mincey,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:20cv1039

The State of Ohio, et al., Judge Michael R. Barrett

Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed by the Magistrate Judge on February 9, 2021 (Doc. 6). 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. 6) have been filed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 6) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge: 1. Plaintiff’s complaint, to the extent plaintiff brings claims against the State of Ohio, is DISMISSED with prejudice because the State of Ohio is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution; 2. Plaintiff’s complaint, to the extent plaintiff brings claims challenging the criminal charges pending against him, is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the Younger abstention doctrine;

1 3. Plaintiff’s complaint, to the extent plaintiff seeks relief based on the alleged actions of non-party defendants, is DISMISSED with prejudice; 4. Plaintiff’s complaint, to the extent any state-law claims remain against defendants, is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c); and

5. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal of this Order adopting the R&R (Doc. 6) would not be taken in good faith. See McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 610–11 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds, Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 203 (2007). This matter is CLOSED and TERMINATED from the active docket of the Court. IT IS SO ORDERED.

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