Brown v. Behavioral Health Group

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE EASTERN DIVISION ______________________________________________________________________________ JAMIE T. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. No. 1:25-cv-01183-JDB-jay BEHAVIORAL HEALTH GROUP, Paris Treatment Center; LISA SMITH, Paris Treatment Center; CHELSEA JOYCE, Doctor; THE VISTRIA GROUP; FRONTENAC; FNU MARSHALL, Doctor; TEDDY REEVES; and KATHY LNU, Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING THE CASE Before the Court is the complaint filed by the Plaintiff, Jamie T. Brown, proceeding pro se. (Docket Entry (“D.E.”) 1.) By Administrative Order, this matter was referred to the United States magistrate judge for management of all pretrial matters and for determination and/or report and recommendation. Admin. Order 2013-05. After reviewing the allegations, Magistrate Judge Jon A. York recommended dismissal. (D.E. 10 at PageID 48.) At the end of the Report and Recommendation, Judge York notified Plaintiff that, if he disagreed with the recommendation, he was required to file an objection or exception within fourteen days. (Id. at PageID 49.) He added that “failure to file [an objection or exception] within fourteen (14) days may constitute a waiver and/or forfeiture of objections, exceptions, and further appeal.” (Id. (emphasis omitted)). Brown has not objected to the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation and the time for doing so has expired. Consequently, he has forfeited his objections to the report and recommendation. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520, 530 (6th Cir. 2019) (quoting Kensu v. Haigh, 87 F.3d 172, 176 (6th Cir. 1996)). Accordingly, upon review of the record, the report and recommendation (D.E. 10) is ADOPTED, Plaintiff’s motion to amend (D.E. 9) is DENIED AS MOOT, Plaintiff’s motion for a restraining order (D.E. 8) is DENIED AS MOOT, and the action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of January 2026. s/ J. DANIEL BREEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE