Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Nathan v. Wilkinson County Correctional Facility

United States District Court, Fifth Circuit

December 30, 2013

SHELDON NATHAN Petitioner,
v.
WILKINSON COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, TIMOTHY MORRIS, LINDA HARDIN, ANGIE HALLOWAY JANITA BIVENS, JANE DOES, AND THEIR LIABILITY INSURERS, AND JOHN DOES, AND THEIR LIABILITY INSURERS, Respondent.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN, District Judge.

BEFORE THE COURT is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker [30] entered on November 14, 2013. Also before the Court is the Plaintiff Sheldon Nathan's ("Plaintiff") Motion for Preliminary Injunction [28] seeking an order that he be transferred to the Central Mississippi Correctional Facility and placed in a single-person cell. Mot. for Prelim. Inj. 2. The Magistrate Judge concluded Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction should be denied because the Motion was factually indistinct from a prior Motion [12] filed by Plaintiff requesting a preliminary injunction for "adequate protection and safe housing, " which was denied by Order [20] dated October 1, 2013, on the basis that Plaintiff failed to establish he was entitled to relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65. The Court has closely reviewed the findings in the Report and Recommendation, the record, and the position Plaintiff advances in the Motion [28], and concludes that the Motion should be denied for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation [30].

To date, no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed by Plaintiff.[1] Where no party has objected to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, a court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1) ("[A] judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). In such cases, the Court need only review the proposed findings of fact and recommendation and determine whether it is either clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989).

Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation thoroughly considered all issues and is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. The Court, being fully advised in the premises, finds that the Magistrate Judge properly recommended that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction should be denied. The Report and Recommendation should be adopted as the opinion of this Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation [30] of Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker entered on November 14, 2013, is adopted as the finding of this Court.

IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction [28] filed October 23, 2013, is DENIED.

SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.