MARLIN v. ANDREWS et al

5:24-cv-00483Gamd13 de abr. de 2026

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

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

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.