Opinion
CASE NO. 4:18CV0835
05-08-2019
NAMON WALTON, Plaintiff, v. LIEUTENANT GEORGEOFF , et al., Defendants.
JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
Pro Se Plaintiff Namon Walton filed this prisoner civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Lieutenant Georgeoff and Correctional Officer Tabak at Federal Correctional Institution Elkton.
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge George J. Limbert for general pretrial supervision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rules 72.1 and 72.2(a). On April 16, 2019, the magistrate judge submitted a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 14) recommending that the Court dismiss the Complaint (ECF No. 1) without prejudice against both defendants for failure to comply with an Order of the Court (ECF No. 12) requiring Plaintiff to perfect service of process or show good cause why service of the summons and complaint had not been completed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); Moncrief v . Stone, 961 F.2d 595, 596 (6th Cir. 1992) (interpreting the predecessor to Rule 4(m)).
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. Objections to the Report were, therefore, due on May 3, 2019. Plaintiff has not filed any objections. Any further review by the Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court's limited resources. Thomas v . Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff'd , 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v . Secretary of Health and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v . Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), three days must be added to the fourteen-day time period because Petitioner was served a copy of the Report by mail. See Thompson v . Chandler, 36 Fed.Appx. 783, 784 (6th Cir. 2002).
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 14) of the magistrate judge is hereby adopted. The file in this case continues to show no service of the summons and complaint upon either defendant. Therefore, the Court dismisses this case without prejudice at Plaintiff's costs.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED. May 8, 2019
Date
/s/ Benita Y . Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge