Spivey v. Furlow et al

Filing 55

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADOPTING 47 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in it entirety; Denying 45 Motion filed by William O Spivey; Denying 46 MOTION for an Emergency Restraining Order and to Ask This Court to Serve a Warrant on Menard Correctional Center filed by William O Spivey. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 6/29/11. (bkl)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
WILLIAM O. SPIVEY,
also known as Kyeanne Michelle,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 10-cv-689-JPG-PMF

LT. JAMES TURLEY, SR.,
Southwestern Illinois Correctional Center,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Philip M. Frazier’s Report
and Recommendation (“R & R”) (Doc. 47) of May 25, 2011, wherein it is recommended that
the Court deny Plaintiff William Spivey’s Motions for Emergency Restraining Order (Docs.
45, 46). Neither Spivey nor Defendant Lt. James Turley, Sr. filed an objection to the R & R.
After reviewing a 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 must review de novo the portions of the report to
which objections are made. 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).

1

Here, again, neither party has filed an objection to the R & R. The Court has
reviewed the R & R for clear error and finds that it is not clearly erroneous. As such, the
Court ADOPTS the R & R (Doc. 47) in its entirety, whereby the Court DENIES Spivey’s
Motions for Emergency Restraining Order (Docs. 45, 46).
IT IS SO ORDERED
DATED: June 29, 2011
s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

2