Pierson v. Neil

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION CLIFTON PIERSON, Case No. 1:19-cv-843 Plaintiff, Barrett, J.

VS. Litkovitz, M.J.

SHERIFF JAMES NEIL, et al., REPORT AND Defendants. RECOMMENDATION This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion for default judgment. (Doc. 7).

In view of the Report and Recommendation dated November 6, 2019 recommending that plaintiffs complaint be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $$ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1) (Doc. 4), which is currently pending before the District Judge, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that plaintiffs motion for default judgment be DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.

Date: 2/16/2021 Karen L. Mitkovitz United States Magistrate Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION CLIFTON PIERSON, Case No. 1:19-cv-843 Plaintiff, Barrett, J. vs. Litkovitz, M.J.

SHERIFF JAMES NEIL, et al., Defendants.

NOTICE Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to this Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. That period may be extended further by the Court on timely motion by either side for an extension of time. All objections shall specify the portion(s) of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. A party shall respond to an opponent’s objections within FOURTEEN DAYS after being served with a copy of those objections. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).