Schwab v. Randall

• Court: District Court, D. Utah
• Decided: January 10, 2025
• Docket: 4:24-cv-00076
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

MICHAEL JAMES SCHWAB ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING Plaintiff, ACTION

v. Case No. 4:24-cv-00076

MICHELE RANDALL, et al. District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen

Defendants. Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler

On September 26, 2024, Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler issued an order directing Plaintiff Michael James Schwab to correct certain deficiencies in his complaint by filing an amended complaint no later than October 28, 2024.1 On November 5, 2024, Judge Kohler, seeing no response to the previous order, issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that this action should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.2 That Report and Recommendation is now before the Court. The Report and Recommendation notified Plaintiff of his right to object within 14 days of service and stated that failure to object may constitute a waiver of objections upon subsequent review.3 No objections have been filed.4 Because Plaintiff has not objected to the Report and

1 ECF No. 7 at 7 2 See ECF No. 10 at 1. 3 Id. at 4. 4 The Court notes that the Report and Recommendation was returned as undeliverable when it was mailed to Plaintiff. See ECF No. 11 at 1. Even so, the Court has no reason to believe that Plaintiff did not receive the Report and Recommendation because it was also emailed to Plaintiff at the email address he provided when he filed his complaint and consented to receive electronic notifications of case activity. Cf. McZeal v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, 679 F. App’x 674, 678 (10th Cir. 2017) (unpublished) (declining to excuse appellants’ failure to object to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, in part, because their claim that they never received the report and Recommendation, and because the analysis and conclusions therein are sound, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10) and DISMISSES Plaintiffs complaint and this action. DATED this 10th day of January 2025. B ye COURT: AMZ— Ann Marie Mclff Allen United States District Judge

recommendation “lack[ed] plausibility,” as “the record show[ed] it was mailed to them at the addresses listed in their complaint”); see ECF No. 1 at 2; ECF No. 4 at 1-2; ECF No. 11 at 2.