DOWNES v. DAVENPORT, 2:15-CV-437-WKW. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20151123635
Visitors: 7
Filed: Nov. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2015
Summary: ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS , Chief District Judge . On October 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 77) to which Plaintiff filed an objection (Doc. # 80). The court has conducted an independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, see 28 U.S.C. 636(b). Plaintiff's arguments do not address or undermine the finding by the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff failed to meet the prerequisites necessary to warrant the extra
Summary: ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS , Chief District Judge . On October 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 77) to which Plaintiff filed an objection (Doc. # 80). The court has conducted an independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, see 28 U.S.C. 636(b). Plaintiff's arguments do not address or undermine the finding by the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff failed to meet the prerequisites necessary to warrant the extrao..
More
ORDER
W. KEITH WATKINS, Chief District Judge.
On October 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 77) to which Plaintiff filed an objection (Doc. # 80). The court has conducted an independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Plaintiff's arguments do not address or undermine the finding by the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff failed to meet the prerequisites necessary to warrant the extraordinary relief of a preliminary injunction. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1) Plaintiff's objection (Doc. # 80) is OVERRULED;
(2) The Recommendation (Doc. # 77) is ADOPTED;
(3) Plaintiff's motions for preliminary injunction (Docs. # 3,4) are DENIED; and
(4) This action is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
Source: Leagle
