United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division
March 3, 2015
MARK MAHAFFEY, Plaintiff,
JOSHUA BUSKIRK, FRANCES HINSLEY, JEFFREY STIEVE, SUMMER LAUGHHUNN, JACOB, SHARP, HARRIET SQUIER, and HARESH B. PANDYA, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 71) AND GRANTING SUMMER LAUGHHUNN'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 36)
AVERN COHN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This is a pro se prisoner civil rights case. Plaintiff is an inmate in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC). He asserts a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants claiming a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights due to inadequate medical care for the treatment of a back condition. The matter was referred to a magistrate judge for all pretrial proceedings. (Doc. 24).
Plaintiff initially named eleven (11) defendants. Following motion practice, the defendants are: Joshua Buskirk, Harriet Squier, Haresh Pandya, Frances Hinsley, Jeffrey Stieve, Summer Laughhunn, Sharp and Jacob.
Laughhunn filed a motion to dismiss (Doc. 36). Plaintiff did not oppose the motion. On February 6, 2015, the magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation, recommending that the motion be granted. (Doc. 71).
Neither party has filed objections to the MJRR and the time for filing objections has passed. The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge's report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the motions. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has reviewed the MJRR and agrees with the magistrate judge's recommendation.
Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court. Laughhunn's motion to dismiss is