West v. Butler et al

Filing 48

ORDER ADOPTING Report and Recommendation (Doc. 47 ): Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 27 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 5/16/2017. (mah)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS KENTES WEST, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, vs. LT. BEBOUT, CHARLES SWISHER, CHAD FRIERDICH, JAMES BEST, and CLINT MAYER, Defendants. Case No. 16-CV-414-SMY-RJD MEMORANDUM AND ORDER YANDLE, District Judge: This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 47) recommending the denial of Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 27). No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); SDIL-LR 73.1(b). For the following reasons, Judge Daly’s Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiff Kentes West filed this lawsuit alleging a variety of claims concerning his conditions of confinement at Menard Correctional Center (Doc. 1). In his motion for preliminary injunction, Plaintiff asserts that he is unsafe at Menard and seeks a transfer to a different IDOC facility. Where timely objections are filed, this Court must undertake a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); SDIL-LR 73.1(b); Harper v. City of Chicago Heights, 824 F. Supp. 786, 788 (N.D. Ill. 1993); see also Govas v. Chalmers, 965 F.2d 298, 301 (7th Cir. 1992). Where neither timely nor specific 1 objections to the Report and Recommendation are made, however, this Court need not conduct a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Instead, the Court should review the Report and Recommendation for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). A judge may then “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). Judge Daly thoroughly discussed and supported her conclusion that Plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to injunctive relief. The Court fully agrees with Judge Daly’s findings, analysis and conclusions and adopts her Report and Recommendation. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: May 16, 2017 s/ Staci M. Yandle STACI M. YANDLE 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?