Opinion
Case No. 1:15-cv-152
11-10-2015
ERIKA WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. EBB COOPER, Defendant.
Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 18)
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 October 21, 2015, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 18). Plaintiff did not file any objections.
As required by 29 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 Recommendation should be and is hereby ADOPTED in its entirety.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons:
1. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 17) is DENIED;
2. Plaintiff is advised as follows:
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4), plaintiff may file, within thirty (30) days after service of any Order adopting the 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). Plaintiff's motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed in the District Court and the District Court's statement of the reasons for denying pauper status on appeal. Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).
Plaintiff 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 $505.00 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 plaintiff 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. Date: 11/10/15
s/ Timothy S . Black
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge