Taylor-Bey v. Deangelo et al

Filing 20

ORDER Adopting in Part 17 Report and Recommendation regarding 3 Motion for Injunctive Relief, and 2 Motion for an urgent Safety Transfer. Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (WBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Leon Taylor-Bey,
Plaintiff,
v.
Jodi Deangelo and Heidi
Washington,

Case No. 23-11958
Judith E. Levy
United States District Judge
Mag. Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr.

Defendants.
________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [17]
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr.’s Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) (ECF No. 17) recommending the Court deny
Plaintiff Leon Taylor-Bey’s motion for an urgent safety transfer (ECF
No. 2) and motion for injunctive relief and immediate consideration (ECF
No. 3) without prejudice. The parties were required to file specific written
objections, if any, within 14 days of service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); E.D.
Mich. L.R. 72.1(d). No objections were filed.
The Court has nevertheless carefully reviewed the R&R and
concurs in the majority of its reasoning and in the result. Specifically, the

Court agrees that a preliminary injunction is not warranted absent
proper notice to Defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(1). (See ECF No. 17,
PageID.117.) While the Court agrees with Judge Ivy that Plaintiff is also
not entitled to a temporary restraining order (“TRO”), the Court will deny
Plaintiff a TRO because he has not demonstrated a strong likelihood of
success on the merits. See Ne. Ohio Coal. for the Homeless v. Blackwell,
467 F.3d 999, 1009 (6th Cir. 2006); see also Obama for Am. v. Husted, 697
F.3d 423, 436 (6th Cir. 2012) (“When a party seeks a [temporary
restraining order] on the basis of a potential constitutional violation, ‘the
likelihood of success on the merits often will be the determinative factor.’”
(citation omitted)).
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 17) is
ADOPTED IN PART. Plaintiff’s motion for an urgent safety transfer
(ECF No. 2) and motion for injunctive relief and immediate consideration
(ECF No. 3) are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 7, 2024
Ann Arbor, Michigan

s/Judith E. Levy
JUDITH E. LEVY
United States District Judge

2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served
upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s
ECF System to their respective email or first-class U.S. mail addresses
disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on February 7, 2024.
s/William Barkholz
WILLIAM BARKHOLZ
Case Manager

3