Johnson v. Nash et al

Filing 59

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that P's 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Robert C. Jones on 8/11/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PM)

FIED
L
ENT D
ERE

RscEj
gEo
SERyED ON
COU EUP TISOFRE
NS AR E
coRn

N

1

At 1 1 2 1
s
21

2

.

2

g
y

(j..r; ;. .yj t ay
y.,j . yjry sy
:.y,
is;,kLrhnua,
; .:..; l y
-;
:a;
.
.

4

j:
y

- -

-

DEPUTY

5

6

UNI
TED STATES DI
STRI C O URT
CT

7

DI
STRI O F NEVADA
CT

8 t t oN J
mus-Evl onNsoN,
9
1
0

Pl n it
aitf

3: CV10- 00197- RCJ VPC

v.

'
O RD ER

11

'

JENN I
FER NASH,eta/,
.
1
2

Def
endant
s.
l
3
1
4

1
5

.

Bef e t Cour i t Rep tand Rec m endaton oft Uni St es M agi tat
or he
t s he
or
om
i
he
t
ed at
sr e

1 Judge ( No.57)(Recommendat )ent ed on. y 5,2O11,i whih t Magitat
6
ECF
'
i
onp er
Jul
n c he
sr e
1 Judger
7
ecommendst t sCourdeny' ai if motonf Pr i nar Ij ton( No.
hat hi
t
pl ntf' i or el
s
mi y nunci ECF

l 1 .
8 6)
1
9
Noobect t t Reporand Rec
j i o he
on
t
ommendai hasbeenfl
ton
i
ed.
20

1 Dl
. scussl
oN

21

Thi Cour *
s
t may accept rj ,or modiy,i wh e or i pad,t fndi or
, eect
f n ol
n
he i ngs

2
2
23
24
25

ro
ec mmen a i smad b t ema itae,2 U. C. 6 b)1 .Fu terun er 8 U. C.
dt
on
e y h gsr t ' 8 S. j 36( ( ) rh , d 2 S.
j 636( ( ) ia pady makes a tmel obect t t magi r e j sr
b)1,f
i y j i o he
on
stat udge' ecommendaton,
i
t t sCour i r r t ' e ade novodet mi i oft
hen hi
l s equied o '
mak
er nat
on hose pori oft Iepor
tons he r t
and r
ecommendaton)t whi obect i made.l Neverhel t satt does not
i o ch j i s
on
n
t ess, he t ue

2 lequiel someI err ew b Ihi Cour)
6 r r)
ess evi y t s
twhennoobectonsar fl ,Thomasv. n,
j i
ei
ed.
Ar 474
27

28

lForanobj i t betmel aparymus gereandfl iwihi 10daysaferbeig
ecton o i y,
t
t v
i t tn
e
t n
sered wiht magi r ej sr
v t he
stat udge' epod and r
ecommendaton.2 U. c. 6 6()1( .
i 8 s. â 3 b()c)
.

1

1
2
3
4

U. 1 0, 49 (98 ,Isea u d tesa ue,hsCou tsn teq r dt c n c M y
S, 4 1 -50 1 5) n t d, n erh tt t t i ri o r ui o o du tan
e
rvi ataI... anyisuet i nott s j tofanobecton. ! . 1 Si l l t
e ew
I of s hats he ubec
j i n1zat 49. mi y,he
ar
Ni hCicuihasr ogniedt adi rct ti notr r t r i amagi r ej s
nt r t ec z hat sti cour s equied o evew
stat udge'
r t r ommendatonwher noobect havebeenfl SeeUniedSt esv.
eporand ec
i
e
j i
ons
i
ed.
t at Revna-

5 Ta a, 28 F.d 1 1 (t Ci. 00 ( seg r igt e san ar ofr iw qmpo e b te
pi 3
3 1 4 9 h r2 3) dir a dn h t d d eve
ly d y h
6 ditit
s rc coudwhen r ewi a r t r ommendatont chnoob ectonswer madel
evi ng epor and ec
i owhi
j i
e
;

.

7 seealoSchmi v.
s
dt Johnsone, F.
t 263 supp. 1 1 ( Arz.
2d 219, 226 D. i 2003)(eadi t Ni h
r ng he nt
8 C icui s deci on i Revna-r a as adoptng t vi t di rctcours ar notr r t
r t
'
si n
- api
i he ew hat sti
t e
equied o

9 r ew u i ue tati nott subj ofan obj i n.
evi any ss h s
he ect
ecton.)Thus,it e i n obj i t a
f her s o ect o
on
1 magitat j
0
s r e udge' r
s ecom mendaton, h t sCour m ayacceptt r
i t en hi
t
he ecom mendatonwih
i t out
#

1 r ew.Seee. ,
l evi
n.Johnsone, F.
t 263 supp. at1 (
2d 226 acceptng, t r ew, magitat
i wi
houtevi a
sr e
1 jdge' r
2 u s ecommendaton t whi noobeci wasfl .
i o ch
j ton
i
ed)
1
3
I t scas t ehavebeennoobect fl t t Magitat Ju sReporand
n hi e,her
j i i o he
ons ed
sr e dge'
t
1 Recommendaton,Alhoughnoobeci wasfl t sCour hasr ewedt Rep and
4
i
t
j ton
i hi
ed,
t
evi
he od
1 Recommendaton ( No,57)andac t i.Acc di y,
5
i ECF
ceps t or ngl
1
6
I I HEREBY ORDERED t Pl nirsPl ntfsmoton f Pr i n ylj i
TS
hat aitf ai i'
f
i or el ar nunct
mi
on
1 ( No.16)i DENI
7 ECF
s
ED.
1
8

I I SO O RD ERED .
T S

1
9

DATED : s
Thi

11 h
t

day ofAugus , 2011.
t

20
21
22

2
3

.
O BERT .
Chi fDi t it
e s rc

-

ur Judge
t

24

25

'

'

26
27

28

2