UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHARLES EDKINS,

Plaintiff, No. 15-10615

v. District Judge Matthew F. Leitman

Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

 /

 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On February 18, 2015, Plaintiff Charles Edkins (“Plaintiff”), formerly housed at

Federal Correctional Institution (“FCI”) Milan in the custody of Bureau of Prisons, filed a

pro se civil complaint under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). Currently

before the Court is Plaintiff and Defendant Matthew Scott Dubois, D.D.S.’s (Dr. Dubois’”)

September 4, 2015 joint motion for the dismissal of Dr. Dubois [Doc. #21], which has been

referred for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). 

In the joint motion, parties state that in fact, Dr. Dubois “is not the correct defendant”

since it was another individual, Defendant Scott Kevin Dubois, D.D.S. who was working at

FCI Milan at the time of the events in question. Both Plaintiff and Dr. Dubois request that

the Court “completely remove” Dr. Matthew Scott Dubois from this case. I agree with both

parties that this Dr. Scott, who coincidentally has a name similar to the intended Defendant, 

-1-

2:15-cv-10615-MFL-RSW Doc # 26 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 221
but has no connection to this case, should be dismissed.

CONCLUSION

I recommend that the joint motion to dismiss [Doc. #21] be GRANTED, dismissing

all claims against Dr. Matthew Scott Dubois WITH PREJUDICE. 

Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed within 14 days of

service of a copy hereof as provided for in 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich. LR

72.1(d)(2). Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of

appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985); Howard v.

Secretary of HHS, 932 F.2d 505 (6 Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6 th th

Cir. 1981). Filing of objections which raise some issues but fail to raise others with

specificity will not preserve all the objections a party might have to this Report and

Recommendation. Willis v. Secretary of HHS, 931 F.2d 390, 401 (6 Cir. 1991); Smith v. th

Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6 Cir. 1987). Pursuant to E.D. th

Mich. LR 72.1(d)(2), a copy of any objections is to be served upon this Magistrate Judge.

-2-

2:15-cv-10615-MFL-RSW Doc # 26 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 222
Within 14 days of service of any objecting party’s timely filed objections, the

opposing party may file a response. The response shall be not more than 20 pages in length

unless by motion and order such page limit is extended by the court. The response shall

address specifically, and in the same order raised, each issue contained within the objections.

/s/R. Steven Whalen 

R. STEVEN WHALEN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Dated: September 30, 2015

Certificate of Service

I certify that a copy of this document was served upon parties of record on

September 30, 2015 via electronic or postal mail. 

/s/C. Ciesla 

CASE MANAGER

-3-

2:15-cv-10615-MFL-RSW Doc # 26 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 223