ATER v. BATH POLICE DEPARTMENT et al, No. 2:2019cv00568 - Document 50 (D. Me. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE accepting Report and Recommendations re: 39 Report and Recommendations; mooting 33 Report and Recommendations ; mooting 15 Order to Show Cause. By JUDGE JON D. LEVY. (aks)

Download PDF
ATER v. BATH POLICE DEPARTMENT et al Doc. 50 Case 2:19-cv-00568-JDL Document 50 Filed 08/17/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 185 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE MELISSA ATER, individually and on behalf of minor child, A.A., ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:19-cv-00568-JDL ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. CITY OF BATH, et al., Defendants. ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff Melissa Ater commenced this action against six Defendants, including Officer John Doe 1, on December 18, 2019 (ECF No. 1). On March 30, 2020, the Plaintiff was ordered to show cause in writing why service had not been timely made upon Defendant Officer John Doe 1 (ECF No. 15). The Plaintiff did not respond to the Order to Show Cause. United States Magistrate Judge John H. Rich III filed a Recommended Decision with the Court on June 30, 2020 (ECF No. 33), pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2020) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), recommending that the Court dismiss the action as to Defendant Officer John Doe 1. Subsequently, the Plaintiff moved for leave to amend her complaint, and her motion was granted. Due to the filing of the amended complaint, the Magistrate Judge filed a Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision with the Court on July 24, 2020 (ECF No. 39) regarding the dismissal of Defendant Officer John Doe 1. The time within which to file objections has expired, and no objections have been 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:19-cv-00568-JDL Document 50 Filed 08/17/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 186 filed. The Magistrate Judge provided notice that a party’s failure to object would waive the right to de novo review and appeal. I have reviewed and considered the Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision, together with the entire record, and have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge. I concur with the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 39) is hereby ACCEPTED. Accordingly, the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 33) and the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 15) are deemed MOOT. SO ORDERED. Dated this 17th day of August, 2020. /s/ Jon D. Levy CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.