5:24-cv-00483•MARLIN v. ANDREWS et al
Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION EUGENE MARLIN, Plaintiff, v. DR. ANDREWS, et al., Defendants. Case No. 5:24-cv-483-TES-ALS ORDER ADOPTING THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) [Doc. 52] to deny Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 34] and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 45]. The parties have not filed a timely objection or sought an extension of time to file an objection within the 14-day period outlined in the magistrate judge’s R&R. [Doc. 52 at pp. 10–11]. Thus, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), in connection with Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1) & (d). Having considered the R&R, the Court finds no clear enumeration of error and agrees with the findings and conclusions of the United States Magistrate Judge. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the United States Magistrate Judge’s R&R [Doc. 52] and MAKES IT THE ORDER OF THE COURT. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Case 5:24-cv-00483-TES-ALS Document 55 Filed 04/13/26 Page 1 of 2
2 Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 34] and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 45]. SO ORDERED, this 13th day of April, 2026. S/ Tilman E. Self, III TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Case 5:24-cv-00483-TES-ALS Document 55 Filed 04/13/26 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.