Opinion
1:19-cv-693
07-23-2021
MITCHELL SPROESSIG, Plaintiff, v. JAMES BLESSMAN, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
HALA Y. JARBOU, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Mitchell Sproessig, a state prisoner, brings a pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dr. Keith Papendick, the sole remaining Defendant in this action, moved for summary judgment based on Sproessig's purported failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 15.) The matter was referred to a magistrate judge, who produced a Report and Recommendation (R&R, ECF No. 22) recommending the Court deny summary judgment and sua sponte dismiss a state law claim asserted by Sproessig.
The R&R was duly served on both parties, who each had fourteen days to file objections. No objections have been filed. The Court will therefore adopt the R&R, deny the motion for summary judgment, and dismiss Sproessig's claim based on Mich. Comp. Laws § 19.142. See Lopp v. Washington, No. 1:19-cv-540, 2019 WL 4161190, at *4 (W.D. Mich. Sept. 3, 2019) (“Plaintiff [prisoner] lacks both standing and legal authority to enforce Mich. Comp. Laws § 19.142. A private citizen ‘lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another.' Diamond v. Charles, 476 U.S. 54, 64 (1986)[.]”).
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the R&R (ECF No. 22) is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 15) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's claim asserted under Mich. Comp. Laws § 19.142 is DISMISSED.