UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

GRANT GILBERT LEE HOLBROOK II], Case No. 1:25-cv-268 Plaintiff, Dlott, J. Litkovitz, M.J. vs. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, ef al., REPORT AND Defendants. RECOMMENDATION

This matter came before the Court on August 14, 2025, for status conference to discuss whether plaintiff intends to proceed with this case. See Order dated July 22, 2025 (Doc. 6). Both parties were present at the conference. As discussed at the conference, plaintiff wishes to dismiss this case. Accordingly, plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed without prejudice. IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT: Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Karen L. Litkovitz United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

GRANT GILBERT LEE HOLBROOK III, Case No. 1:25-cv-268 Plaintiff, Dlott, J. Litkovitz, M.J. vs.

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, 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 within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. This period may be extended further by the Court on timely motion by either side for an extension of time. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring on the record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon, or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); United States v. Walters,

(6th Cir. 1981).