From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richardson v. Indus. Comm'n of Ohio

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
Dec 9, 2013
Case No. 3:09-cv-455 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 9, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 3:09-cv-455

12-09-2013

EARL RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, et al., Defendants.


District Judge Thomas M. Rose

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (Doc. #40), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations.

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for in forma pauperis status is DENIED. The Court also certifies to the United States Court of Appeals that Plaintiff's appeal is objectively frivolous.

_________________

Thomas M. Rose

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Richardson v. Indus. Comm'n of Ohio

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
Dec 9, 2013
Case No. 3:09-cv-455 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 9, 2013)
Case details for

Richardson v. Indus. Comm'n of Ohio

Case Details

Full title:EARL RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI

Date published: Dec 9, 2013

Citations

Case No. 3:09-cv-455 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 9, 2013)