Opinion
Case No. 3:17-cv-432
11-13-2019
GARY L. MCCOY, Plaintiff, v. DR. RODNEY L. CARLSON, et al., Defendants.
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 89) BE DENIED AS MOOT
Attached hereto is a NOTICE to the parties regarding objections to this Report and Recommendation.
This civil case is before the Court on Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's third amended complaint. Doc. 89. Following the filing of this motion, Plaintiff, with leave of Court having been granted (doc. 116), filed a fourth amended complaint (doc. 117). Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that Defendants' motion to dismiss the third amended complaint (doc. 89) be DENIED AS MOOT. See Laning v. Doyle, No. 3:14-cv-24, 2014 WL 2805240, at *1-2 (S.D. Ohio June 20, 2014).
Notably, Defendants have now filed motions to dismiss Plaintiff's fourth amended complaint (docs. 128, 139), which remain pending and will be addressed together when both motions are ripe for adjudication. Date: November 13, 2019
s/ Michael J. Newman
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. This period is not extended by virtue of Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) if served on you by electronic means, such as via the Court's CM/ECF filing system. If, however, this Report and Recommendation was served upon you by mail, this deadline is extended to SEVENTEEN DAYS by application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). Parties may seek an extension of the deadline to file objections by filing a motion for extension, which the Court may grant upon a showing of good cause.
Any objections filed 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 noted above, this period is not extended by virtue of Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) if served on you by electronic means, such as via the Court's CM/ECF filing system. If, however, this Report and Recommendation was served upon you by mail, this deadline is extended to SEVENTEEN DAYS by application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d).
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).