Opinion
23-12742
04-23-2024
MICHAEL MOHAMED SALAMI, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 11), REVOKING IFP STATUS, DENYING PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT, AND DISMISSING CASE
SEAN F. COX, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
Acting pro se, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendants the United States Department of State and the National Passport Information Center on October 27, 2023. On November 21, 2023, this Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Anthony Patti for all pretrial proceedings.
On December 4, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting to participate in mediation or arbitration. (ECF No. 6).
In an Order issued on February 21, 2024, Magistrate Judge Patti granted Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF No. 7).
On March 8, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 10).
In an Report and Recommendation issued on March 25, 2024, Magistrate Judge Patti states that he was not initially aware that Plaintiff “had ‘three strikes' from previous litigations,” and thus his application to proceed in forma pauperis should have been denied under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PLRA”). (ECF No. 11, R&R at 4-6). Having now reviewed Plaintiff's complaint under the applicable standards, the magistrate judge concludes that the Court “should REVOKE Plaintiff Michael Salami's IFP status, DISMISS the case, and DENY all pending motions (ECF No. 6 & 10) as moot.” (R&R at 7).
Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a matter by a magistrate judge must file objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the R&R. The district judge to whom the case is assigned reviews those objections, and any response to the objections from the opposing party. “The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).
The time permitted for the parties to file objections to that Report and Recommendation has passed and no objections were filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the March 25, 2024 Report and Recommendation and ORDERS that Plaintiff's IFP status is REVOKED, all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT, and this action is DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.