Dorsey v. Audu et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
QUAN DORSEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No.: 24-cv-10519
Honorable Gershwin A. Drain
AUDU and G. MIKAT, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION [#28], GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT [#21], DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
OBJECT TO THE ORDER ADDRESSING PLAINTIFF’S PRETRIAL
MOTIONS AND DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by
Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy, recommending that the Court grant the Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a)
due to Plaintiff’s failure to fully exhaust his administrative remedies. Neither party
has filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and
the time for filing objections has expired. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Upon review of the Magistrate Judge’s September 9, 2025 Report and
Recommendation, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge reached the
Case 2:24-cv-10519-GAD-CI ECF No. 30, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/29/25 Page 1 of 4

2
correct 	conclusion. 	Therefore, 	the 	Court 	hereby 	ACCEPTS 	and 	ADOPTS
Magistrate Judge Ivy’s Report and Recommendation [#28], dated September 9,
2025, as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Additionally, before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Object to the Order
Issued Addressing Plaintiff’s Pretrial Motions, which the Court construes as an
“Appeal of Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy’s Order” resolving Plaintiff’s Motion to
Deny Defendant’s Waiver and Motion for Clarification. A decision and order of a
magistrate judge will be upheld unless it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). Magistrate Judge Ivy’s September 9, 2025 Order is
neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.
Plaintiff’s present appeal ignores the fact that E.D. Mich. L.R. 4.1(a) is
inapplicable to him because he was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 	As such, E.D. Mich. L.R. 4.1(b) applies, which states in
pertinent part that “[u]nless the plaintiff requests otherwise, the Clerk must arrange
for service of the summons and complaint by the United States Marshal for a
plaintiff authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915[.]” E.D.
Mich. L.R. 4.1(b).
Plaintiff never requested that the United States Marshal forego service of
process in this matter. 	In fact, Plaintiff sent a letter requesting a status update for
service of process on the defendants. 	See ECF No. 8. 	He did not indicate in his
Case 2:24-cv-10519-GAD-CI ECF No. 30, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/29/25 Page 2 of 4

3
letter that he sought an alternate method of service different than service by the
U.S. Marshal. 	Id. 	In any event, Plaintiff incorrectly argues the U.S. Marshal had
no authority to send a waiver of service form to the Defendants. 	Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 4(d) expressly allows a defendant subject to service to request a
waiver. 	See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(1). 	Plaintiff mistakenly believes he has the right
to preclude a defendant from requesting a waiver of service. 	To the contrary, any
individual defendant subject to service of process is authorized to seek a waiver.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d); 4(e).
Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy’s September 9, 2025 Report and
Recommendation [#28] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as this Court’s findings of
fact and conclusions of law.
Defendants’ 	Motion 	for 	Summary 	Judgment 	[#21] 	is 	GRANTED.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Object to the Order Issued Addressing Plaintiff’s
Pretrial 	Motions 	[#29] 	construed 	as 	an 	“Appeal 	of 	Magistrate 	Judge 	Ivy’s
September 9, 2025 Order” is DENIED.
This cause of action is dismissed without prejudice.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 29, 2025 	/s/Gershwin A. Drain
GERSHWIN A. DRAIN
United States District Judge
Case 2:24-cv-10519-GAD-CI ECF No. 30, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/29/25 Page 3 of 4

4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record and on Quan Dorsey,
#814459, Woodland Center Correctional Facility, 9036 E. M-36, Whitmore Lake,
MI 48189 on
October 29, 2025, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
/s/ Marlena Williams
Case Manager
Case 2:24-cv-10519-GAD-CI ECF No. 30, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/29/25 Page 4 of 4