From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lathan v. Hudson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Sep 1, 2009
Case No. 3:08 CV 406 (N.D. Ohio Sep. 1, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. 3:08 CV 406.

September 1, 2009


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed July 28, 2009 in the above-entitled action. Under the relevant statute:

Within ten days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (1982). In this case, the ten-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed. The failure to file written objections to a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984) affirmed, 474 U.S. 140 (1985);see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and adopts that Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Petitioner's motion to amend the petition is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lathan v. Hudson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Sep 1, 2009
Case No. 3:08 CV 406 (N.D. Ohio Sep. 1, 2009)
Case details for

Lathan v. Hudson

Case Details

Full title:DAREK LATHAN, Petitioner, v. STUART HUDSON, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: Sep 1, 2009

Citations

Case No. 3:08 CV 406 (N.D. Ohio Sep. 1, 2009)

Citing Cases

Gerber v. Riordan

The text of Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) provides relief from judgment on six enumerated grounds: (1) mistake,…