The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
:
FRANCIS JAMES KEARNS, : CASE NO. 5:22-cv-00390
:
Petitioner, : OPINION & ORDER
: [Resolving Docs. 3, 4, 8, 10]
v. :
:
OHIO ADULT PAROLE :
AUTHORITY, :
:
Respondent. :
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE:
Plaintiff Francis James Kearns brings this habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. §
2254, challenging actions of the Ohio State Board of Parole (“Respondent”). Respondent
filed a motion to dismiss,1 and Kearns opposes it.2 Kearns also filed motions for temporary
restraining orders and a motion for entry of judgment on these motions.3 Respondent
opposes the latter motion.4
On December 28, 2022, Magistrate Judge Knapp filed a Report and Recommendation
(“R & R”) recommending that the Court (1) grant Respondent’s motion to dismiss, (2) dismiss
without prejudice Kearns’ petition, (3) equitably toll the AEDPA statute of limitations for the
claim raised in the Petition within certain specified parameters, and (4) deny without
prejudice as MOOT Kearns’ motions for injunctive relief.5
Plaintiff did not file an objection to the R & R.
1 Doc. 8.
2 Doc. 9.
3 Docs. 3, 4, 10.
4 Doc. 11.
The Federal Magistrates Act requires district courts to conduct a de novo review only
of objected-to portions of an R & R.6 Absent objection, district courts may adopt an R & R
without review.7
So, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Knapp’s R & R, GRANTS Respondent’s
motion to dismiss, and DENIES Kearns’ habeas corpus petition and motions for injunctive
relief.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 31, 2023
JAMES S. GWIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
7 , 474 U.S. 140, 149–52 (1985). Failure to timely object may waive a party's right to appeal