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)

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