From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rieger v. Gen. Dynamics

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Dec 17, 2013
Case No.: 3:13-cv-402 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 17, 2013)

Opinion

Case No.: 3:13-cv-402

12-17-2013

JOSEPH M. RIEGER, Plaintiff, v. GENERAL DYNAMICS, Defendant.


Judge Walter H. Rice

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Attached hereto is a NOTICE to the parties regarding objections to this Report and Recommendation.

The Court previously granted Defendant's motion for a 21-day extension of time in which to file an answer or otherwise respond to pro se Plaintiff's complaint. Doc. 6. Now before the Court is pro se Plaintiff's motion for a "default judgment and rejection of Defendant's request for [an] enlargement of time." Doc. 7.

Recognizing that the Court has previously granted Defendant additional time in which to respond to the complaint, Plaintiff's challenge to that Order is untimely and merits denial. Additionally, recognizing that the 21-day period referenced above has not expired, Plaintiff's motion for default judgment is, at this time, premature.

Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's motion (doc. 7) be denied.

_______________

Michael J. Newman

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within FOURTEEN days after being served with this Report and Recommendation. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is extended to SEVENTEEN days because this Report and Recommendation is being served by one of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), and may be extended further by the Court on timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report and Recommendation objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections within FOURTEEN days after being served with a copy thereof. As is made clear above, this period is likewise extended to SEVENTEEN days if service of the objections is made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F). Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).


Summaries of

Rieger v. Gen. Dynamics

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Dec 17, 2013
Case No.: 3:13-cv-402 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 17, 2013)
Case details for

Rieger v. Gen. Dynamics

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH M. RIEGER, Plaintiff, v. GENERAL DYNAMICS, Defendant.

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

Date published: Dec 17, 2013

Citations

Case No.: 3:13-cv-402 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 17, 2013)