Hines v. Smith et al
Filing
135
ORDER denying 121 Motion for TRO; denying 121 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; adopting Report and Recommendations re 130 Report and Recommendation.(Written Opinion) Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 4/20/2018. (DLO)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Civil No. 16cv3797(DSD/SER)
FREDRICK DEWAYNE HINES,
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
MICHELLE SMITH, Warden, “MNDOC”
Oak Park Heights; TAMMY WHERELY,
Associate Warden Administration;
DAVID RHESUIS, Associate Warden
Operation; SHAR MIKE, Program
Director ACU/CX-5 Units;
SHERILINDA WHEELER, Program
Director; UNKNOWN MAGADANZ,
Lieutenant ACI/CX-5, CX-7 Units;
and Dan Meyer, Lieutenant
ACU-CX-5 Units, individually and
in their official capacities,
Defendants.
This
matter
is
before
the
court
upon
the
report
and
recommendation of Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau dated March 27,
2018 (R&R).
The magistrate judge recommended that the court deny
pro se plaintiff Fredrick Dewayne Hines’s motion for a temporary
restraining order or preliminary injunction.
No objections to the
R&R have been filed in the time period permitted.1
Under these
circumstances, the court finds it appropriate to adopt the R&R.
1
After the R&R was filed, Hines filed a document titled
“Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant’s
Memorandum of Law to Deny Temporary Restraining Order Preliminary
Relief.” See ECF No. 131. To the extent Hines intends this to be
an objection to the R&R, the court overrules it. After a de novo
review, the court finds that the R&R is well reasoned and correct.
Further, Hines merely reasserts the arguments already made in his
original motion; he does not make any specific objection to the
R&R.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.
The R&R [ECF No. 130] is adopted in its entirety; and
2.
Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order or
preliminary injunction [ECF No. 121] is denied with prejudice.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: April 20, 2018
s/David S. Doty
David S. Doty, Judge
United States District Court
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?