Swartz et al v. Howe et al, No. 2:2019cv13035 - Document 27 (E.D. Mich. 2020)
Court Description: OPINION and ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING 21 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Denying 5 MOTION Objection of Case Removed to Federal Court, Granting 6 MOTION to Dismiss, and Dismissing 1 Notice of Removal (Complaint) - Signed by District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds. (LBar)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Swartz et al v. Howe et al Doc. 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION STEVE-LEE SWARTZ and JACOB LEE SWARTZ, Case No. 19-13035 Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds Plaintiffs, v. OFFICER DILLION HOWE, ET. AL., Defendants. / ORDER ACCEPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S AUGUST 10, 2020 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [21] Pending before the Court is the magistrate judge’s August 10, 2020 report and recommendation. (ECF No. 21.) The magistrate judge recommends that the Court deny Plaintiffs’ objection to removal of this action to this Court (ECF No. 5) and grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 6). The Court is fully advised in the premises and has reviewed the record and the pleadings. None of the parties timely filed objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, which ordinarily “releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter.” Hall v. Rawal, 09-10933, 2012 WL 3639070, at *1 (E.D.Mich. Aug. 24, 2012) (citation omitted). However, after the deadline to file its response, Plaintiffs filed their Statement of Fact and Response to Report and Recommendation and Firsthand Witness Testimony. (ECF No. 22.) Having reviewed Plaintiffs’ brief and Defendants response, the Court finds that Plaintiffs fail to raise any valid objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Moreover, after 1 Dockets.Justia.com reviewing the entire record in this matter, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The Court therefore ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, DENIES Plaintiffs’ objection to removal, and GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss. It is further ordered that Plaintiffs’ complaint is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. SO ORDERED. s/Nancy G. Edmunds Nancy G. Edmunds United States District Judge Dated: September 17, 2020 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on September 17, 2020, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Lisa Bartlett Case Manager 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.
