Norfleet v. Walker et al

Filing 128

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER adopting 126 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, granting 81 MOTION to Dismiss Count 3 of Plaintiff's Complaint as to his Request for Injunctive Relief filed by Mary B Loftin. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 6/7/2011. (dka, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
MARC NORFLEET,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 09-cv-347-JPG

ROGER E. WALKER, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Frazier’s Report and
Recommendation (“R & R”) (Doc. 126) of May 2, 2011, wherein it is recommended that
Defendant Loftin’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 81) be granted and that Plaintiff
Norfleet’s prayer for injunctive relief in Count 3 of Norfleet’s complaint against Loftin be
dismissed. Neither party has objected to the R & R.
After reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the Court may accept,
reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations of the magistrate judge in
the report. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court has discretion to conduct a new hearing and may
consider the record before the magistrate judge anew or receive any further evidence deemed
necessary. Id. “If no objection or only partial objection is made, the district court judge reviews
those unobjected portions for clear error.” Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th
Cir. 1999).

Accordingly, because the parties did not object, the Court will be reviewing Judge

Frazier’s R & R for clear error.
The Court has reviewed the entire file and finds that the R & R is not clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the R & R (Doc. 126), which GRANTS Loftin’s
Motion for Summary Judgement (Doc. 81) and DISMISSES Norfleet’s prayer for injunctive

relief in Count 3 of Norfleet’s complaint against Loftin.
IT IS SO ORDERED
DATED: June 7, 2011
s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE