Deeds v. Aranas et al

Filing 97

ORDER granting ECF No. 55 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot ECF No. 41 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Clerk directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 07/18/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 RICHARD DEEDS, 4 CASE NO.: 3:15-CV-00547-RCJ-VPC Plaintiff, ORDER 5 v. 6 ROMEO ARANAS, et al., 7 Defendant. _______________________________________ 8 9 Before the Court is the Reports and Recommendations of U.S. Magistrate Judge (ECF #921) 10 entered on June 20, 2017, recommending that the Court grant Defendants’ Motion for Summary 11 Judgment (ECF #55) and deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF #41). On July 6, 12 2017, Plaintiff filed his Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF #95). On 13 July 11, 2017, Defendants filed a Response to Plaintiff’s Objections (ECF #96). 14 The Court has conducted it’s de novo review in this case, has fully considered the objections of 15 the Plaintiff, the pleadings and memoranda of the parties and other relevant matters of record pursuant 16 to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Magistrate Judge’s 17 Reports and Recommendation (ECF #92) entered on June 20, 2017, should be ADOPTED AND 18 ACCEPTED. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #55) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (#41) is DENIED as MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of July, 2017. 26 27 _____________________________________ ROBERT C. JONES 28 1 Refers to court’s docket number.

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?