MURPHY v. CORIZON et al

Filing 60

ORDER adopting 54 Report and Recommended Decision for 48 Motion for Order for Court Intervention / Motion for Sanctions (Motion for Preliminary Injunction) filed by CAROL MURPHY, denying 48 Motion for Order for Court Intervention / Motion for Sanctions (Motion for Prelimimary Injunction). By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
CAROL MURPHY,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORIZON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:12-cv-00101-JAW

ORDER AFFIRMING THE
RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on November
16, 2012 her Recommended Decision (ECF No. 54). The Plaintiff filed her
objections to the Recommended Decision on December 5, 2012 (ECF No. 56);
Defendants Corizon, Rich Hallworth, Hope LeBlanc, Praveen Pavuluru,
Larry Rudzinsky, Stockwell, and Kent Topel filed their response to those
objections on December 20, 2012 (ECF No. 58).

I have reviewed and

considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the
entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated
by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the
recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set
forth in her Recommended Decision, and determine that no further
proceeding is necessary.
1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the
Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.

2. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Order for
Court Intervention/Motion for Sanctions (Motion for Preliminary
Injunction) (ECF No. 48) be and hereby is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ John A. Woodcock, Jr.
JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR.
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 21st day of December, 2012

2