Filed: Jun. 04, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2013
Summary: ORDER JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge. The pro se plaintiff, Jerry Nelson, brought an action against the defendants in state court alleging various claims of sexual assault, failure to protect, and abuse. The defendants removed the action to this court on July 23, 2012 under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The plaintiff has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO). The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action 1 has prepared a Report and Recommendation wherein he suggests that this
Summary: ORDER JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge. The pro se plaintiff, Jerry Nelson, brought an action against the defendants in state court alleging various claims of sexual assault, failure to protect, and abuse. The defendants removed the action to this court on July 23, 2012 under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The plaintiff has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO). The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action 1 has prepared a Report and Recommendation wherein he suggests that this c..
More
ORDER
JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge.
The pro se plaintiff, Jerry Nelson, brought an action against the defendants in state court alleging various claims of sexual assault, failure to protect, and abuse. The defendants removed the action to this court on July 23, 2012 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO).
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and Recommendation wherein he suggests that this court should deny the plaintiff's motion for a TRO. The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation and without a hearing.
The parties were advised of their right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. The court has conducted the required de novo review and finds the plaintiff's objections are without merit and are thus overruled.
The Magistrate Judge has reviewed the plaintiff's motion for a TRO under the appropriate standards of law and opines that the plaintiff has failed to show that he is clearly entitled to the relief sought. This court has also carefully reviewed the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation, and the objections thereto, and finds the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to be proper and incorporates the Report herein by reference.
Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order (ECF No. 44) is denied. The Clerk is directed to return this file to the Magistrate Judge for further review of the defendants' motion to dismiss and to stay discovery.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
