UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

REBECCA SUZANNE DENOFRE,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:20-cv-191 v. HON. JANET T. NEFF FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff initiated this action on October 1, 2020 with the filing of a complaint against the Federal Bureau of Investigation and nineteen other Defendants (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 7). On October 8, 2020, pursuant to

(e)(2), the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R), recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim (ECF No. 8). Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommended that (1) every Defendant, except for the unidentified FBI agents and Matthew Weise, be dismissed due to lack of personal involvement in the subject matter of Plaintiff’s complaint; (2) Plaintiff’s claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act be dismissed for failure to state any factual allegations that could plausibly satisfy the elements of such a claim; and (3) to the extent Plaintiff asserts state-law claims, such be dismissed without prejudice (id. at PageID.41, 43). The matter is presently before the Court on Plaintiff’s November 4, 2020 letter, which was docketed as Objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 11). Plaintiff has also since filed a motion for “One Judge Grand Jury to Investigate Allegations of Crime” (ECF No. 12), “Motion of Misconduct” (ECF No. 15), and motion for discovery (ECF No. 16). In her letter, Plaintiff merely objects to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation as a “fraud” (ECF No. 11 at PageID.47). Plaintiff fails to address, let alone demonstrate any error in, the Magistrate Judge’s analysis. Therefore, in accordance with

(b)(1) and FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3), the Court denies the Objections and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation as the Opinion of this Court. Plaintiff’s motions are therefore properly denied as moot. Because this Opinion and Order resolves all pending claims, a Judgment will also be entered consistent with this Opinion and Order. See FED. R. CIV. P. 58. Further, because this action was filed in forma pauperis, this Court also certifies pursuant to

(a)(3) that an appeal of this Judgment would not be taken in good faith. See McGore v. Wrigglesworth,

(6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock,

(2007). Accordingly: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Objections (ECF No. 11) are DENIED and the

Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 8) is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED; specifically, pursuant to

(e)(2)(ii), Plaintiff’s federal claims are dismissed with prejudice, and, to the extent Plaintiff has alleged state-law claims, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims and dismisses them without prejudice pursuant to

(c)(3). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for “One Judge Grand Jury to Investigate Allegations of Crime” (ECF No. 12), “Motion of Misconduct” (ECF No. 15), and motion for discovery (ECF No. 16) are DENIED as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court certifies pursuant to

(a)(3) that an appeal of the Judgment would not be taken in good faith.

Dated: February 10, 2021 /s/ Janet T. Neff JANET T. NEFF United States District Judge