Williams v. Womble et al (INMATE 2)
ORDERED as follows: (1) Plf's 31 objection is OVERRULED; (2) The 25 Recommendation is ADOPTED; (3) Plf's 19 motion for a preliminary injunction is DENIED; and (4) The case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 1/21/2016. (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
RONNIE V. WILLIAMS, #239426,
JOSEPH WOMBLE, et al.,
CASE NO. 2:15-CV-728-WKW
On January 7, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation
(Doc. # 25) to which Plaintiff filed an objection (Doc. # 31).
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), and finds
that the objection is without merit.1 Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. # 31) is OVERRULED;
The Recommendation (Doc. # 25) is ADOPTED;
Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. # 19) is
The objection references a potential appeal of the order denying Plaintiff’s motion for a
temporary restraining order (Doc. # 20). However, an order denying a temporary restraining
order is not appealable. See Mitsubishi Int’l Corp. v. Cardinal Textile Sales, Inc., 14 F.3d 1507,
1515 (11th Cir. 1994) (“Final judgments and collateral orders are appealable . . . but non-final
orders are not; preliminary injunctions are appealable but temporary restraining orders are not.”).
The case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further
DONE this 21st day of January, 2016.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?