From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Durham v. Sheets

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Sep 30, 2015
Case No. 1:13-cv-226 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 30, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 1:13-cv-226

09-30-2015

ROY A. DURHAM, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN MICHAEL SHEETS, et al., Defendants.



Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 93)

This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on July 2, 2015, submitted a Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 93). The Petitioner timely filed objections. (Doc. 100).

Plaintiff's objections reiterate the arguments set forth in his memorandum contra to the motion for judgment on the pleadings and in his motion to stay the proceedings (See Docs. 83,91). These arguments were fully addressed in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations. (See Doc. 93). This Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's reasoning as explained therein. --------

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Report and Recommendations should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly:

1. The Report and Recommendations (Doc. 93) is ADOPTED;

2. Plaintiff's motion to stay (Doc. 91) is DENIED;

3. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 65) is GRANTED;

4. Defendants' motion for extension of time (Doc. 101) is DENIED as moot; and

5. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3), an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore, Plaintiff is denied leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

6. The Clerk shall enter judgment according, whereupon this civil action is TERMINATED in this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 9/30/2015

/s/Timothy S . Black

Timothy S. Black

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Durham v. Sheets

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Sep 30, 2015
Case No. 1:13-cv-226 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 30, 2015)
Case details for

Durham v. Sheets

Case Details

Full title:ROY A. DURHAM, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN MICHAEL SHEETS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Sep 30, 2015

Citations

Case No. 1:13-cv-226 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 30, 2015)