Opinion
Case No. 14-cv-11112
06-13-2016
ORDER CONCERNING POSSIBLE OBJECTIONS TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #149) AND RESPONSE TO ANY OBJECTIONS
On June 10, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (the "R&R," ECF #149) with respect to the motions for summary judgment filed by the Defendants (the "Motions," ECF ## 103, 104, 105.) The Court is aware of the large volume of material that was presented to the Magistrate Judge in connection with the Motions, and the Court has conducted a preliminary review of the R&R. It is abundantly clear that the Magistrate Judge spent a substantial amount of time analyzing the parties' arguments and considering the voluminous record in this case.
In order to avoid this Court unnecessarily duplicating the Magistrate Judge's efforts and in order to conserve limited judicial resources, the Court will strictly enforce the rule requiring any objections to the R&R to be specific. (See R&R at 52, Pg. ID 5821.) Each objection must specifically identify the precise portion of the R&R to which it is addressed and must demonstrate how the Magistrate Judge erred. Plaintiff must specifically craft each objection with reference to the R&R. Plaintiff shall not re-file as its objections the briefs (or portions thereof) originally filed in opposition to the Motions If Plaintiff files an objection(s) and Defendants wish to respond, Defendants' response(s) shall specifically address the points made in the objections and the portions of the R&R addressed in the objections. Defendants shall not re-file as their responses to Plaintiff's objection(s) the briefs (or portions thereof) originally filed in support of the Motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: June 13, 2016
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on June 13, 2016, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
(313) 234-5113