*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION A.B.D., ) CASE NO.: 5:18CV2274
) ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE JOHN ADAMS
) ) ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND SECURITY, ) ORDER )
Defendant. )
) This matter comes before the Court on objections filed by Plaintiff A.B.D. to the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Magistrate Judge. On June 19, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued her R&R in this matter recommending that the Court dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. On September 11, 2019, Plaintiff objected to the R&R. The Court now resolves the objection.
District courts conduct de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge’s R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Herein, Plaintiff does not dispute that she failed to file a brief as required by the scheduling order of the magistrate judge. Moreover, the docket reflects that even without a formal request, Plaintiff’s deadline to file a brief was extended by 60 days. In her objection, Plaintiff reiterates her desire for counsel. As with the requests that were made to the magistrate judge, Plaintiff has not provided any factual basis to *2 support her request. Accordingly, the Court will not appoint counsel.
For the reasons stated above, A.B.D.’s objections are OVERRULED. The R&R is ADOPTED IN WHOLE. This matter is hereby DISMISSED for want of prosecution. Dated: November 13, 2019 /s/ John R. Adams JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE