Anderson v. Clinton Township Police Department

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Anderson v. Clinton Township Police Department

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT ANDERSON, 2:18-CV-11291-TGB

Plaintiff,

vs. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CLINTON TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 59)

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael J. Hluchaniuk’s January 3, 2020 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 59), recommending that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 50) be GRANTED. The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. The law provides that either party may serve and file written objections “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy” of a report and recommendation.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). The district court will make a “de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made.”

Id.

Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the

record. See Thomas v. Arn,

474 U.S. 140, 149-52

(1985). The Court will therefore accept the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation of January 3, 2020 as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Hluchaniuk’s Report and Recommendation of January 3, 2020 is

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. SO ORDERED

DATED this 5th day of February, 2020. BY THE COURT:

/s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown