UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

MYLES ALEXANDER #862651,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 14-14629

v. HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH

RANDALL HAAS, et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION (DOC. 45), GRANTING DEFENDANTS 

BROWN-BRANDON AND MARUTIAK’S MOTION TO 

DISMISS (DOC. 35), AND GRANTING DEFENDANT HAAS’ 

MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 38)

Plaintiff, a prison inmate in the custody of the Michigan Department of

Corrections (“MDOC”), filed the instant civil rights action against various employees at

MDOC’s G. Robert Cotton Correctional Facility (“Cotton Facility”), where Plaintiff was

previously incarcerated. These defendants are Warden Randall Haas, Deputy Wardens

Cascelia Brown-Brandon and Fredeane Artis, Administrative Hearing Officer Michael

Marutiak, and inspectors James Roth and K. Howard. In short, Plaintiff alleges that

Roth and Howard falsely implicated him in a contraband-smuggling incident. Haas,

Brown-Brandon, Artis, and Marutiak believed the false representations “to be true and

had no reasons to believe that [they] were untrue.” (Compl. ¶ 15). Based on Roth’s

and Howard’s false representations, Haas, Brown-Brandon, Artis, and Marutiak

“place[d] plaintiff in segregation. Had they known the true facts[,] they would not have

taken such action.” (Id.). The Court previously issued an order dismissing defendants

-1-

2:14-cv-14629-GCS-RSW Doc # 46 Filed 09/01/16 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 203
Roth, Artis, and Howard. Thus, only defendants Haas, Brown-Brandon, and Marutiak

remain.

Now before the Court are Brown-Brandon and Marutiak’s motion to dismiss (Doc.

35) and Haas’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 38). The Court referred the defendants motions

to Magistrate Judge Whalen for a report and recommendation (“R&R”). In his R&R, the

Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant both motions. The Magistrate

Judge found Brown-Brandon, Marutiak, and Haas all have qualified immunity, because

“[b]y Plaintiff’s own admission, these Defendants did not knowingly violate any clearly

established right, nor did they act unreasonably—either objectively or

subjectively—under the circumstances.” (R&R at 7). The Magistrate Judge further

explained that Plaintiff’s claims against Brown-Brandon, Marutiak, and Haas in their

official capacities are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 

Plaintiff has not objected to the R&R. The R&R specifically stated that any

objections must be filed within fourteen days of service of the R&R. Moreover, the R&R

specifically stated that a failure to file objections would constitute a waiver of any further

right to appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); Cowherd v. Million, 380

F.3d 909, 912 (6th Cir. 2004). Finding the R&R to be well-reasoned, the Court hereby

ACCEPTS the result recommended therein. Accordingly, Brown-Brandon and

Marutiak’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 35) is GRANTED, and Haas’s motion to dismiss

(Doc. 38) is also GRANTED. The complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 1, 2016

s/George Caram Steeh 

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

2:14-cv-14629-GCS-RSW Doc # 46 Filed 09/01/16 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 204
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

September 1, 2016, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and

also on Myles Danard Alexander #862651, 

Carson City Correctional Facility, 10274 Boyer Road, 

Carson City, MI 48811.

s/Barbara Radke

Deputy Clerk

-3-

2:14-cv-14629-GCS-RSW Doc # 46 Filed 09/01/16 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 205