McAlphin v. Correct Care Solutions, LLC, 2:17-cv-00093-KGB. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20180518882
Visitors: 4
Filed: May 17, 2018
Latest Update: May 17, 2018
Summary: ORDER KRISTINE G. BAKER , District Judge . The Court has received Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. No. 42). Plaintiff James McAlphin filed a supplement to his request for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 43). However, no objections to the Proposed Findings and Recommendations have been filed, and the time for filing objections has passed. 1 After review, this Court adopts the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in
Summary: ORDER KRISTINE G. BAKER , District Judge . The Court has received Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. No. 42). Plaintiff James McAlphin filed a supplement to his request for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 43). However, no objections to the Proposed Findings and Recommendations have been filed, and the time for filing objections has passed. 1 After review, this Court adopts the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in t..
More
ORDER
KRISTINE G. BAKER, District Judge.
The Court has received Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. No. 42). Plaintiff James McAlphin filed a supplement to his request for preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 43). However, no objections to the Proposed Findings and Recommendations have been filed, and the time for filing objections has passed.1 After review, this Court adopts the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. Mr. McAlphin's motion for preliminary injunction is denied (Dkt. No. 38).
It is so ordered.
FootNotes
1. The Court notes that Mr. McAlphin filed objections out of time (Dkt. Nos. 47). Those objections appear directed to Judge Kearney's next Proposed Findings and Recommendations in this case (Dkt. No. 45). To the extent those objections are directed at the Proposed Findings and Recommendations the Court has under consideration now (Dkt. No. 42), even if considered along with a de novo review of the record, those objections would not change the Court's determination to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations currently under consideration (Dkt. No. 42).
Source: Leagle
