Summary
finding the plaintiff's state claims preempted where her allegations made clear that she was actually pleading a breach of the duty of fair representation
Summary of this case from Lunn v. Aramark Mgmt. Servs. Ltd. P'shipOpinion
Case No. 15-cv-11329
08-21-2015
SUSAN TOCARCHICK, Plaintiff, v. UAW REGION 1 et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #11) , GRANTING DEFENDANT UAW REGION 1'S MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF #4), AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (ECF #1)
On January 22, 2015, Plaintiff Susan Tocarchick ("Tocarchick") filed a pro se Complaint in the Macomb County Circuit Court against Defendant UAW Region 1 and four other Defendants (the "Complaint"). (See ECF #1 at 8-23, Pg. ID 8-23.) It appears that UAW Region 1 is the only Defendant Tocarchick served with the Complaint. (See id. at 2, Pg. ID 2.) UAW Region 1 removed Tocarchick's action to this Court (see ECF #1), and it moved to dismiss the claims Tocarchick brought against it (the "Motion to Dismiss"). (See ECF #4.)
On July 30, 2015, Magistrate Judge David Grand issued a Report and Recommendation in which he recommended that the Court (1) grant the Motion to Dismiss and (2) dismiss Tocarchick's claims against all of the Defendants. (See ECF #11.) The R&R stated that the parties could seek review of the recommendation if they filed "specific written objections" within fourteen days. (See id. at 9-10, Pg. ID 179-180.)
Neither party has objected to the R&R. Failure to file objections to the R&R waives any further right to appeal. See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); see also Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has nevertheless reviewed the R&R and agrees with the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's July 30, 2015, Report and Recommendation (ECF #11) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of this Court; that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF #4) is GRANTED; and that Tocarchick's Complaint (ECF #1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 21, 2015
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on August 21, 2015, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
(313) 234-5113