Roy v. NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner et al

Filing 24

///ORDER approving 10 and 19 Report and Recommendations; denying 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying 4 Motion for Extraordinary Handling of Enclosed Pleadings. The federal claims are dismissed and the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. Clerk to enter judgment and close the case. So Ordered by Judge Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.(dae)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Steven J. Roy
v.

Civil No. 12-cv-303-JD

William Wrenn, et al.
O R D E R
Steven J. Roy, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights
action against the New Hampshire Department of Corrections,
Commissioner William Wrenn, New Hampshire State Prison Warden
Richard Gerry, and New Hampshire State Prison Major Jon Fouts.
Roy also sought a preliminary injunction and “extraordinary
handling of enclosed pleadings.”

The magistrate judge issued a

report and recommendation to deny the motion for a preliminary
injunction.

The magistrate also issued a report and

recommendation on preliminary review, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and
1915A, to dismiss the action and to deny the motion for
extraordinary handling.

Roy did not file an objection to either

report and recommendation.1
“Given adequate notice, ‘a party’s failure to assert a
specific objection to a report and recommendation irretrievably

1

Roy moved for reconsideration of the report and
recommendation to deny his motion for a preliminary injunction,
which was denied by the magistrate judge.

waives any right to review by the district court and the court of
appeals.’”

Corets-Rivera v. Dep’t of Corrs. & Rehab. of P.R.,

626 F.3d 21, 27 (1st Cir. 2010) (quoting Santiago v. Canon
U.S.A., Inc., 138 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 1998)).

In the conclusion

section of each report and recommendation, the magistrate judge
informed Roy that any objection was due within fourteen days and
that failure to file an objection within the time allowed would
waive review by the district court and court of appeals.
Therefore, Roy was given adequate notice that a failure to object
to the reports and recommendations would result in waiver and has
waived review of the reports and recommendations.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the report and recommendation
(document no. 10) to deny the plaintiff’s motion for a
preliminary injunction (document no. 3) and the report and
recommendation (document no. 19) to dismiss the action and to
deny the motion for extraordinary handling (document no. 4) are
approved and adopted.

The motion for a preliminary injunction

(document no. 3) and the motion for extraordinary handling
(document no. 4) are denied.
The federal claims are dismissed, and the court declines to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.
28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3).
2

The clerk of court shall enter judgment accordingly and
close the case.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________
Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.
United States District Judge
January 29, 2013
cc:

Steven J. Roy #68033

3