UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

DOMONIQUE DEMETRIS FARR,

Plaintiff, Case No. 1:23-cv-1135 v. HON. JANE M. BECKERING GRETCHEN WHITMER, et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________/

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Domonique Demetris Farr, proceeding pro se, initiated this case against Governor Gretchen Whitmer, the Michigan Law Revision Commission, and the State of Michigan. On January 23, 2024, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the action be dismissed upon initial screening pursuant to

(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff lacks standing to prosecute his claims. The matter is presently before the Court on Plaintiff’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 9). In his objections, Plaintiff reiterates that “the act of the STATE was unconstitutional,” but he agrees that his Complaint did not “create a stand for suit” (ECF No. 9 at PageID.30). He further indicates that he does “not plan to pursue this any further” (id.). In accordance with

(b)(1) and FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3), the Court has performed de novo consideration of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. The Court determines that Plaintiff fails to demonstrate any factual or legal error in the Magistrate Judge’s standing analysis or conclusion that Plaintiff’s Complaint is properly dismissed. Therefore, the Court denies the objections and will enter a Judgment to close this case. See FED. R. CIV. P. 58. For the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation and because this action was filed in forma pauperis, this Court also certifies pursuant to

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

, 610–11 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v.

Bock,

, 211–12 (2007). Accordingly: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Objections (ECF No. 9) 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 the Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED pursuant to

(e)(2)(B) for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court certifies pursuant to

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

Dated: March 13, 2024 /s/ Jane M. Beckering JANE M. BECKERING United States District Judge