BAYSE v. DOIZER et al
Filing
36
ORDER adopting 35 Report and Recommendations; denying 19 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE TILMAN E SELF, III on 11/2/2018 (lap)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
ROBBIN AMANDA BAYSE, a/k/a
ROBERT BAYSE,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO.
5:18-cv-00049-TES-CHW
Comm’r GREGORY DOZIER, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
______________________________________________________________________________
Presently before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation [Doc. 35] regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and
Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. 19]. The Magistrate Judge recommends denying
Plaintiff’s motion because Plaintiff has not shown any of the four elements required for
preliminary injunctive relief. 1 The parties filed no timely objections to the
recommendation.
1
A party moving for a preliminary injunction must show:
(1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; (2) that irreparable injury will be
suffered unless the injunction issues; (3) the threatened injury to the movant outweighs
whatever damage the proposed injunction may cause the opposing party; and (4) if
issued, the injunction would not be adverse to the public interest.
[Doc. 35, p. 4 (quoting Four Seasons Hotel and Resorts, B.V. v. Consorcio Barr, S.A., 320 F.3d 1205, 1210 (11th
Cir. 2003)].
After thorough review, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation
[Doc. 35] and MAKES IT THE ORDER OF THE COURT. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion
for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. 19] is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this 2nd day of November, 2018.
S/ Tilman E. Self, III
TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
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?