Opinion
Case Number 10-12823
05-14-2012
JOSEPH CORSETTI, Plaintiff, v. MARK A. HACKEL, DEPUTY CAMPAU, SGT. SCHULTZ, SGT. B. KUTELL, DEPUTY MASAKOWSKI, DEPUTY MAZZARELLI, DEPUTY METRY, DEPUTY FURNO, JANE DOE, VALERIE WATKINS, JOHN DOE, JAMES M. BIERNAT, MARGARET DEMUYNCK, JANE DOE, MICHELL M. SANBORN, ONVIGBO, JASON MCTEVIA, ELIZABETH CARVER, SGT. NEUMEYER, PATRICK RICHARD, and ROBERT WROBLEWSKI, Defendants.
Honorable David M. Lawson
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Hluchaniuk
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Presently before the Court is the report issued on April 24, 2012 by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Hluchaniuk pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), recommending that this Court deny the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. Although the magistrate judge's report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, no objections have been filed thus far. The parties' failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge's report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation [dkt. #85] is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction [dkt. #63] is DENIED.
______________________
DAVID M. LAWSON
United States District Judge
PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on May 14, 2012.
DEBORAH R. TOFIL