Jeter v. Lawless

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION RAVON L. JETER, SR., Plaintiff, Case No. 1:19-cv-623 v. JUDGE DOUGLAS R. COLE Magistrate Judge Karen Litkovitz BRYAN LAWLESS, Defendant.

ORDER On April 20, 2020, Magistrate Judge Litkovitz issued a Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”) (Doc. 22) recommending the Court deny Defendant Bryan Lawless’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11). The R&R advised the parties that failing to object within 14 days would constitute a forfeiture of the right to review. (R&R at #117 (first citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); then United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981))).

Now, the time period for objection has run (indeed, more than run), and no party has objected. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). “There is no indication that Congress, in enacting § 636(b)(1)(C), intended to require a district judge to review a magistrate’s report to which no objections are filed.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 152; see also Berskhire v. Beauvais, 928 F.3d 520, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (noting “fail[ure] to file an objection to the magistrate judge’s R&R … is forfeiture, not waiver”). Thus, the Court ADOPTS and AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Litkovitz’s R&R (Doc. 22), thereby DENYING Lawless’ Motion (Doc. 11).

SO ORDERED.

May 21, 2020 DATE DOUGLAS R. COLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE