Brown v. Chase Bank, No. 1:2014cv00807 - Document 23 (W.D. Mich. 2015)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 19 ; denying objection 20 ; granting motion to dismiss 8 ; Judgment to issue; signed by Judge Janet T. Neff (Judge Janet T. Neff, rmw)
Download PDF
Brown v. Chase Bank Doc. 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TYROSH BROWN, Plaintiff, v Case No. 1:14-cv-807 CHASE BANK, HON. JANET T. NEFF Defendant. _______________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action in July 2014. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6), Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim (Dkt 8), and Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the motion (Dkt 14). The Magistrate Judge to whom this matter was referred issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R), recommending that this Court grant Defendant’s motion and terminate this case (Dkt 19). Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s objection to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt 20), to which Defendant filed a response (Dkt 21). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3), the Court has performed de novo consideration of the portion of the Report and Recommendation to which objection has been made, and, for the following reasons, denies the objection. The Court determines that the Magistrate Judge carefully and thoroughly considered Plaintiff’s Complaint and the case law relevant to his allegations therein. Plaintiff proffers no argument that would warrant rejecting the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion that Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Rather, Plaintiff’s objections merely lodge Dockets.Justia.com unsupported charges of “bias” and demonstrate his overall dissatisfaction with the result in his case. See W.D. Mich. LCivR 72.3(b) (requiring an objecting party to “specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings, recommendations or report to which objections are made and the basis for such objections”); see also Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994) (“Judicial rulings alone almost never constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.”). Therefore, the Court denies Plaintiff’s objection to the Report and Recommendation and approves and adopts the Report and Recommendation as the Opinion of the Court. Because this Opinion and Order resolves the last pending claim in this case, the Court will also enter a Judgment. See FED. R. CIV. P. 58. Accordingly: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Objection (Dkt 20) is DENIED, and the Report and Recommendation (Dkt 19) is APPROVED and ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt 8) is GRANTED. Date: July 20, 2015 /s/ Janet T. Neff JANET T. NEFF United States District Judge Page 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.