Opinion
21-12166
07-22-2022
Kamiryn Parr, Plaintiff, v. Ken Spurling, Katherine Cody, Michael Hoffman, Rachel Marie Pierce, Anthony Turner, Rose LNU, and Dollar General, Defendants.
David R. Grand, Mag. Judge
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [9]
JUDITH E. LEVY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge David Grand's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (ECF No. 9) recommending that the Court dismiss pro se Plaintiff Kamiryn Parr's complaint against the Defendants Ken Spurling, Katherine Cody, Michael Hoffman, Rachel Marie Pierce, Anthony Turner, Rose LNU, and Dollar General (ECF No. 1). Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m) and E.D. Mich. LR 41.2, Judge Grand recommends that Plaintiff's complaint against Defendants be dismissed without prejudice because she failed to serve Defendants or otherwise complete and present to the Clerk's Office documents necessary to effect service in this case. (See ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff also did not respond to the May 31, 2022 Order to Show Cause. (Id.) The parties were required to file specific written objections to the R&R, if any, within fourteen days of service. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); E.D. Mich. LR 72.1(d). No objections were filed. The Court has nevertheless carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs in the reasoning and result.
Accordingly, the R&R (ECF No. 9) is ADOPTED and the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
By failing to object to the Report and Recommendation, the parties have forfeited any further right of appeal. See United States v. Wandahsega, 924 F.3d 868, 878 (6th Cir. 2019); see also Berkshire v. Beauvais, 928 F.3d 520, 530 (6th Cir. 2019).
IT IS SO ORDERED.