Harris v. Eagle Security Service

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Harris v. Eagle Security Service

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

JAYLIN HARRIS,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:25-cv-11321

v. Honorable Susan K. DeClercq United States District Judge EAGLE SECURITY SERVICE, Honorable David R. Grand Defendant. United States Magistrate Judge ___________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 26), AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT (ECF Nos. 18; 19)

On July 21, 2025, Magistrate Judge David R. Grand issued a report, ECF No. 26, recommending that this Court deny Plaintiff Jaylin Harris’s two, effectively identical motions for default judgment. ECF Nos. 18; 19. Judge Grand provided 14 days to object, but the Parties did not do so. They have therefore forfeited their right to appeal Judge Grand’s findings. See Berkshire v. Dahl,

928 F.3d 520

, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn,

474 U.S. 140, 149

(1985)). Moreover, having reviewed the report and recommendation, this Court will adopt the recommendation in full because it finds no clear error. See Roby v. Bloom Roofing Sys,

343 F.R.D. 487

, 490 (E.D. Mich. 2023) (noting that a clearly erroneous finding is one that leaves this Court with a firm and definite conviction that the magistrate judge made a mistake). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 26, is ADOPTED.

Further, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motions for Default Judgment, ECF Nos. 18 and 19, are DENIED. This is not a final order and does not close the above-captioned case.

/s/Susan K. DeClercq SUSAN K. DeCLERCQ United States District Judge Dated: September 11, 2025

Reference

Status
Unknown