Opinion
Civil No. 10-5052.
July 19, 2010
ORDER
NOW on this 19th day of July 2010, comes on for consideration the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (document #3), filed on March 17, 2010, and plaintiff's objections thereto (document #4), filed on March 26, 2010. The Court, being well and sufficiently advised, finds and orders as follows with respect thereto:
1. Plaintiff's objections offer neither law nor fact requiring departure from the Report and Recommendation and the same should and will be overruled.
2. The Report and Recommendation is sound in all respects and should be adopted in toto.
3. The plaintiff is advised that he may reopen the case on payment of the $350 filing fee and the filing of a motion to reopen. See Witzke v. Hiller, 966 F.Supp. 538, 540 (E.D. Mich. 1997) (revoking IFP status under section 1915(g) and dismissing action without prejudice to inmate's right to re-file it upon payment of filing fee).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED
* that plaintiff's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report And Recommendation should be, and they hereby are, overruled;
* that the said Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation should be, and it hereby is, adopted in toto. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, plaintiff's IFP application should be, and hereby is, denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and this case is dismissed.