Murphy v. Lashbrook, 17-CV-1154-SMY-RJD. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20190718977
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jul. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 16, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STACI M. YANDLE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 82), recommending the denial of Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief (Doc. 48). No objections have been filed to the Report. For the following reasons, Judge Daly's Report is ADOPTED. When neither timely nor specific objections to a Report and Recommendation are made, the Court need not con
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STACI M. YANDLE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 82), recommending the denial of Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief (Doc. 48). No objections have been filed to the Report. For the following reasons, Judge Daly's Report is ADOPTED. When neither timely nor specific objections to a Report and Recommendation are made, the Court need not cond..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STACI M. YANDLE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 82), recommending the denial of Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief (Doc. 48). No objections have been filed to the Report. For the following reasons, Judge Daly's Report is ADOPTED.
When neither timely nor specific objections to a Report and Recommendation are made, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of the Report. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Instead, the Court reviews the Report for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). The Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Here, Judge Daly thoroughly discussed and supported her conclusions that Plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to injunctive relief. The Court finds no clear error in Judge Daly's findings, analysis and conclusions, and adopts her Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 48) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
