Hunter v. Harris et al

Filing 76

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING 74 Non-Final Report and Recommendations and DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 61 / 62 Motions for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Mark H. Cohen on 5/25/2017. (jkl)

Download PDF
IN T H E UNITED STATES D I S T R I C T COURT F O R T H E NORTHERN D I S T R I C T O F G E O R G I A ATLANTA DIVISION JOHN HUNTER, PRISONER C I V I L RIGHTS 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Plaintiff, V. M. HARRIS, et al C I V I L ACTION F I L E NO. l:15-CV-3386-MHC-AJB Defendants. ORDER The matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Alan J. Baverman's Non-Final Report and Recommendation [Doc. 74] ("R&R"), which recommends that Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction [Docs. 61, 62] be denied without prejudice. The Order for Service of the R&R [Doc. 75] provided notice that, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the parties were authorized to file objections within fourteen (14) days of the receipt of that Order. No objections have been filed to the report and recommendation. Absent objection, the district court judge "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), and "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record" in order to accept the recommendation. FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee's note to 1983 amendment. The Coml has reviewed the R&R and finds no clear error and that the R&R is supported by law. The Court APPROVES AND ADOPTS the Non-Final Report and Recommendation [Doc. 74] as the as the Opinion and Order of the Court. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's motion for preliminary injunction [Docs. 61, 62] be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk is directed to re-submit this matter to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of May, 2017. MARIC H. COJJEN United States District Judge 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?