The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge
This matter comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Philip M. Frazier's Report and Recommendation ("R & R") (Doc. 55) of May 2, 2011, which recommends, inter alia, that the Court grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 24) and Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 39). No party filed an objection thereto.
After reviewing a report and recommendation, the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations of the magistrate judge in the report. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court must review de novo the portions of the report to which objections are made. The Court has discretion to conduct a new hearing and may consider the record before the magistrate judge anew or receive any further evidence deemed necessary. Id. "If no objection or only partial objection is made, the district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error." Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999).
Here, again, neither party has filed an objection to Magistrate Judge Frazier's R & R. The Court has reviewed the R & R for clear error and finds that it is not clearly erroneous. Being fully advised of the premises, the Court ADOPTS the R & R (Doc. 55) in its entirety, whereby the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 24) and Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 39). Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the following claims with prejudice:
* Plaintiff's medical care claim alleging cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution for denial of a back brace and cane; and
* Plaintiff's claim alleging cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution for specific slip and fall incidents.
Further, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint by July 1, 2011, in order to obtain and submit the requisite certificate of merit for his medical malpractice claim. Finally, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly at the close of this case.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...