From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

INA Grp. v. Patel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Nov 27, 2019
Case No. 1:18cv733 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 27, 2019)

Opinion

Case No. 1:18cv733

11-27-2019

INA Group, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Nathubhai Patel, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") filed by the Magistrate Judge on October 21, 2019 (Doc. 15).

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 Report and Recommendation 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. 15) have been filed.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 15) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge, plaintiff's Motion to Proceed on Appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 13) is DENIED.

Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4), Defendant may file, within thirty (30) days after service of the District Court's Order adopting this Report and Recommendation, a motion with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed as a pauper on appeal. Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir. 1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal Service, 105 F.3d 274 (6th Cir. 1997). Defendant's motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed in the District Court and this Court's statement as to the reasons for denying pauper status on appeal. Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). Defendant is notified that if she does not file a motion within thirty (30) days of receiving notice of the District Court's decision as required by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5) or fails to pay the required filing fee of $455.00 within this same time period, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Callihan, 178 F.3d at 804. Once dismissed for want of prosecution, the appeal will not be reinstated, even if the filing fee or motion for pauper status is subsequently tendered, unless Defendant can demonstrate that she did not receive notice of the District Court's decision within the time period prescribed for by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). Id.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Michael R . Barrett

Michael R. Barrett, Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

INA Grp. v. Patel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Nov 27, 2019
Case No. 1:18cv733 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 27, 2019)
Case details for

INA Grp. v. Patel

Case Details

Full title:INA Group, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Nathubhai Patel, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Nov 27, 2019

Citations

Case No. 1:18cv733 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 27, 2019)

Citing Cases

Ramsey v. Boilermaker-Blacksmith Nat'l Pension Tr.

INA Grp., LLC v. Patel, No. 1:18CV733, 2019 WL 13197948, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 27, 2019) (citing…

Jesus v. DLJ Props.

Should Plaintiffs not file a motion within thirty (30) days of receiving the Chief District Judge's decision,…