Atwood v. United States of America
Atwood v. United States of America
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
DAVID GARLAND ATWOOD, II, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-17-00629-PRW ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) DOCTOR SPENCER ZEAVIN, ) PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT AARON ) RUSSELL, DOCTOR DAVID HUNTER, ) and DOCTOR KEITH CLARK, ) ) Defendants. )
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On August 22, 2019, United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell issued a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 96) in this matter recommending that the Court: (1) grant Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Dkt. 92);
(2) dismiss this action with prejudice to refiling and close the case; and
(3) deem Defendant United States’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 89) (SEALED) moot.
The parties were advised of their right to file an objection to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 96) on or before September 12, 2019,1 but no objections have been filed. Thus, the parties have waived further review of the issues addressed in the Report
1 R. & R. (Dkt. 96) at 5. and Recommendation (Dkt. 96).” Under
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), a district judge has [pwer to “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge” and “also [to] receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” Upon de novo review, the Court: (1) ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 96) issued by the Magistrate Judge on May 30, 2019; (2) GRANTS the Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Dkt. 92) and accordingly DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the entire action; and (3) | deems Defendant United States’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 89) (SEALED) MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED this 23rd day of September, 2019.
PATRICK R. WYRICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Olivera v. Cate, No. 5:14-cv-00162-D,
2016 WL 1436694, at *1 (W.D. Okla. Apr. 11, 2016) (citing Moore v. United States,
950 F.2d 656, 659(10th Cir. 1991); United States v. 2121 E. 30th Street,
73 F.3d 1057, 1060(10th Cir. 1996)).
Reference
- Status
- Unknown