Dewayne Gee v. Experian Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DEWAYNE GEE, Case No. 25-11550 Plaintiff, F. Kay Behm v. United States District Judge EXPERIAN INC., Kimberly G. Altman United States Magistrate Judge Defendant. ____________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S DECEMBER 30, 2025, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 34) AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE (ECF No. 31) Currently before the court is Magistrate Judge Altman’s December 30, 2025 Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 34). Judge Altman recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 31) be denied without prejudice as premature, because Plaintiff filed his motion prior to discovery occurring and Defendant has properly shown by affidavit that they cannot yet present facts essential to justify their opposition to the motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d). The court is fully advised in the premises and has reviewed the record and the pleadings. Neither party has filed timely objections. “[T]he failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report[] releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter.” Hall v. Rawal, 2012 WL 3639070 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 24, 2012) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). The court nevertheless agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s recommended disposition.

The court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 34) and DENIES the Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 31) WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED.

Date: January 21, 2026 s/F. Kay Behm F. Kay Behm United States District Judge