Cardenas-Uriarte v. USA et al

Filing 52

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER,the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report in its entirety (Doc. 50 ) and GRANTS Defendants USA and Charles E. Samuels Motion (Doc. 44 ) for Partial Summary Judgment. Counts 1 and 6 are DISMISSED without prejudice and Plaintiffs Request for Preliminary Injunctive Relief/Request for Hearing (Doc. 47 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 9/1/2015. (jdh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CIPRIANO CARDENAS-URIARTE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
USA, et al.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 14-cv-00747-JPG-PMF

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the Report and Recommendationi (“R & R”) (Doc.
50) of Magistrate Judge Philip M. Frazier with regard to Defendants USA and Charles E.
Samuels’ Motion (Doc. 44) for Partial Summary Judgment and Plaintiff’s Request for
Preliminary Injunctive Relief/Request for Hearing (Doc. 47). Neither party filed an objection to
the R & R.
The Court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations of the magistrate judge in a report and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b)(3). 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).
The Court has received no objection to the Report and Recommendation. The Court has
reviewed the entire file and finds that the R & R is not clearly erroneous. Accordingly, the Court
hereby ADOPTS the Report in its entirety (Doc. 50) and GRANTS Defendants USA and
Charles E. Samuels’ Motion (Doc. 44) for Partial Summary Judgment. Counts 1 and 6 are

DISMISSED

without

prejudice

and

Plaintiff’s

Request

for

Preliminary

Injunctive

Relief/Request for Hearing (Doc. 47) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 9/1/2015
s/J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

i

The R & R incorrectly states that the merit review was conducted on July 23, 2015. The date should read July 23,
2014.