Opinion
CIVIL 23-12328
07-22-2024
FREDDREKA WALKER Plaintiff, v. DEANNA HARRIS, MARY COYLE KAREN THOMAS, CRAIG KLINE MD, and RN KUZ, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING JUNE 26, 2024 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 37)
LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Pro se Plaintiff Freddreka Walker (“Walker”) commenced this lawsuit against Deanna Harris, Mary Coyle Karen Thomas, Craig Kline MD, and RN Kuz (“Defendants”) on September 13, 2023. (ECF No. 1.) On March 4, 2024, Defendant Craig Kline, MD (“Dr. Kline”) filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 16.) Walker responded to the motion to dismiss by way of an amended complaint. (ECF No. 24.) Thereafter, Dr. Kline moved to dismiss the amended complaint. (ECF No. 29.)
The matter has been assigned to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand for all pretrial proceedings, including a hearing and determination of all non-dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF No. 11.)
On June 26, 2024, Magistrate Judge Grand issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court grant Dr. Kline's motion to dismiss the amended complaint and deny, as moot, the motion to dismiss the original complaint. (ECF No. 37 at PageID. 186.) At the conclusion of his R&R, Magistrate Judge Grand advises the parties that they may object to and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service upon them. He specifically advises the parties that “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right to appeal.” (Id. (alteration added).) More than fourteen days have passed since service upon the parties and no objections to the R&R have been filed.
The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Grand. The Court therefore adopts the R&R.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Dr. Kline's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (ECF No. 29) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Dr. Kline's motion to dismiss the original complaint (ECF No. 16) is DENIED AS MOOT.