From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Staples v. Jillerat

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Nov 21, 2018
Case No. 1:17-cv-742 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 21, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 1:17-cv-742

11-21-2018

RAHSON STAPLES, Plaintiff, v. CODEY JILLERAT, et al., Defendants.



Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 32)

This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on October 30, 2018, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 32). No objections were filed.

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that the Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby ADOPTED in its entirety.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above:

1) Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 31) is DENIED.

2) Plaintiff is advised of the following:

Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4), Plaintiff may file, within thirty (30) days after service of any Order adopting the Report and Recommendation, a motion with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to proceed as a pauper on appeal. Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir. 1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal Service, 105 F.3d 274 (6th Cir. 1997). Plaintiff's motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed in the District Court and the District Court's statement of the reasons for denying pauper status on appeal. Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5).

Plaintiff is notified that if he does not file a motion within thirty (30) days of receiving notice of the District Court's decision as required by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5), or fails to pay the required filing fee of $505.00 within this same time period, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. Callihan, 178 F.3d at 804. Once dismissed for want of prosecution, the appeal will not be reinstated, even if the filing fee or motion for pauper status is subsequently tendered, unless plaintiff can demonstrate that he did not receive notice of the District Court's decision within the time period prescribed for by Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). Id.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 11/21/18

/s/_________

Timothy S. Black

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Staples v. Jillerat

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Nov 21, 2018
Case No. 1:17-cv-742 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 21, 2018)
Case details for

Staples v. Jillerat

Case Details

Full title:RAHSON STAPLES, Plaintiff, v. CODEY JILLERAT, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Nov 21, 2018

Citations

Case No. 1:17-cv-742 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 21, 2018)