UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Martez Hudson,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:25cv506

Correctional Officer Lorenzo, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed by the Magistrate Judge on October 31, 2025 (Doc. 9). Proper notice has been given to the parties under

(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties may forfeit rights on appeal if they failed to file objections to the R&R in a timely manner. United States v. Walters,

(6th Cir. 1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge’s R&R (Doc. 9) have been filed and the time to do so has expired. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 9) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge: 1. Plaintiff’s

claims against Defendants for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and deprivations of due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to

(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1);

1 2. Plaintiff’s state-law claim against Defendants for fraud is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to

(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1); 3. The Court certifies that pursuant to

(a)(3) that an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith. See McGore v. Wrigglesworth,

(6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds, Jones v. Bock,

(2007); and 4. This dismissal shall count as a “strike” in accordance with the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

(g). IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Michael R. Barrett Michael R. Barrett, Judge United States District Court

2