Rice v. Jones et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION - CINCINNATI
NATHANIEL DANTE RICE, 	Case No. l:22-cv-695
Plaintiff, 	Judge Matthew W. McFarland
V.
SHERIFF RICHARD K. JONES, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 59)
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz (Doc. 59), to whom this case is referred. No objections
have been filed and the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has
expired. Although the Report and Recommendation was mailed to the address that
Plaintiff most recently provided to the Court, it was returned as undeliverable. (Mail
Returned, Doc. 61.) A litigant has "an affirmative duty to supply the court with notice of
any and all changes in [his] address." Barber v. Runyon, No. 93-6318, 1994 WL 163765, at
*1 (6th Cir. May 2, 1994); see also Bond v. Ford Motor Co., No. 3:24-CV-258, 2025 WL
1680251, at *2 (W.D. Ky. May 14, 2025), report and recommendation adopted, No. 3:24-CV-
258, 2025 WL 1679529 (W.D. Ky. June 13, 2025).
Upon review, the Court agrees with the reasoning of the Magistrate Judge and
ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 59) in its entirety. Plaintiff's Motion for
Extension of Time to Object (Doc. 57), which the Court construes as a motion for relief
Case: 1:22-cv-00695-MWM-KLL Doc #: 62 Filed: 12/01/25 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>

from judgment, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
B	;~-vr.~ ~
JUDGE MATTHEW W . McFARLAND
2
Case: 1:22-cv-00695-MWM-KLL Doc #: 62 Filed: 12/01/25 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>