Opinion

Richard D. Johnson v. Dale Foltz Robert Brown, Jr. John Whelan

  • 863 F.2d 883
  • 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 16340
  • 1988 WL 128066
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed
Dec 2, 1988
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.1%

The opinion

863 F.2d 883

Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.

Richard D. JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

Dale FOLTZ; Defendant-Appellee,

Robert Brown, Jr.; John Whelan, Defendants.

No. 88-1740.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Dec. 2, 1988.

Before KEITH and KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judges, and CONTIE, Senior Circuit Judge.

ORDER

1

This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the record, motion to dismiss, and appellant's brief, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

2

Richard Johnson brought this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 , claiming that the defendants violated his constitutional rights when they refused to allow him to participate in college classes while incarcerated. The defendants were the Director of the Michigan Department of Corrections, the warden and the deputy warden at Jackson State Prison. He requested monetary and injunctive relief.

3

The district court dismissed the Director of the Department of Corrections and the deputy warden since Johnson failed to state a cause of action against them. The court then reviewed the magistrate's report and recommendation, noted that Johnson failed to file any objections, then granted the defendant's motion to dismiss. Johnson raises the same claim on appeal.

4

Initially, we note that a motion to dismiss ordinarily may not be filed on grounds other than lack of jurisdiction. Rule 8(a)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Failure to file objections to the magistrate's report and recommendation does not go to subject matter jurisdiction. See Kent v. Johnson, 821 F.2d 1220, 1222-23 (6th Cir.1987). Thus, defendants' motion to dismiss is improper and will be denied.

5

Upon consideration of the cause, we affirm the district court's dismissal of the complaint. Johnson failed to file any objections within ten days of the date of service of the magistrate's report and recommendation, despite being specifically advised to do so. A party who does not file timely objections to a magistrate's report and recommendation after being advised to do so waives his right to appeal. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir.1981).

6

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied and the district court's judgment is hereby affirmed. Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.