From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Boysen

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Feb 26, 2024
1:23-cv-996 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 26, 2024)

Opinion

1:23-cv-996

02-26-2024

COURTNEY THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. DAVID BOYSEN, et al., Defendants.


HON. JANE M. BECKERING

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

SALLY J. BERENS, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Courtney Thomas filed his complaint in this action in the Kalamazoo County Circuit Court on or about August 22, 2023, against Defendants David Boysen, the Chief of Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety (KDPS); KDPS Training Division; KDPS Officer Bradley Spieldenner; and Officer John Bastian. Plaintiff alleged that Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Michigan Penal Code Act 328 of 1931. Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner removed the case to this Court on September 19, 2023, alleging federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 as the basis for removal jurisdiction. (ECF No. 1 at PageID.2.)

On November 6, 2023, I issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) recommending that Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) be granted. (ECF No. 10.) Defendant Bastian had not been served at the time Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner filed their motion. Regardless, I found that Plaintiff failed to allege a valid claim as to any Defendant, including Defendant Bastian. (Id. at PageID.53-55.)

Accordingly, I recommended that the Court dismiss the complaint in its entirety. (Id. at PageID.56.)

After I issued the R&R, Defendant Bastian filed his own motion to dismiss (ECF No. 12), noting the R&R's conclusion that all Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity and recommending that Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner's motion be granted. Defendant Bastian contends that for the same reasons set forth in the R&R, the action should also be dismissed as to him. (Id. at PageID.67-69.)

Because, as set forth in the R&R, Defendant Bastian is entitled to the same relief as Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), I recommend that Defendant Bastian's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) be GRANTED and that he be dismissed from this action along with Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner.

NOTICE TO PARTIES

OBJECTIONS to this Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk of Court within 14 days of the date of service of this notice. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Failure to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court's order. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).


Summaries of

Thomas v. Boysen

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Feb 26, 2024
1:23-cv-996 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 26, 2024)
Case details for

Thomas v. Boysen

Case Details

Full title:COURTNEY THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. DAVID BOYSEN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Feb 26, 2024

Citations

1:23-cv-996 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 26, 2024)