Alili v. American Express Company

Filing 24

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 21 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly 13 Motion for TRO filed by Mahmoud Ossama Alili is denied. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 3/7/2025. (wam)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Mahmoud Alili,
Plaintiff,
v.
American Express Company,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Case No. 1:24-cv-101
Judge Susan J. Dlott
Order Adopting Report and
Recommendation and
Denying Motion for Restraining Order

This matter is before the Court on the Order and Report and Recommendation entered by
Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on February 12, 2025. (Doc. 21.) The Magistrate Judge
recommended that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Restraining Order, which she treated as
a motion for preliminary injunction. (Docs. 13, 21.) Plaintiff was not represented by counsel
when he filed the initial Complaint or the Motion for Restraining Order. However, counsel
entered an appearance on his behalf on May 29, 2025, before the issuance of the Report and
Recommendation. (Doc. 19.) Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation.
Title 28 U.S.C § 636(b)(1)(B) & (C) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 72(b)(1)
authorize magistrate judges to make recommendations concerning dispositive motions and
prisoner petitions challenging conditions of confinement. Parties then have fourteen days to
make file and serve specific written objections to the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C.
636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). “The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the
recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge
with instructions.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (substantially
similar).
1

The Court agrees with the well-reasoned Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff failed to
explain the factual bases for his federal consumer protection claims in the initial Complaint. He
did not establish that he was entitled to injunctive relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65
in the Motion for Restraining Order.
The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED, and Plaintiff’s Motion for
Restraining Order (Doc. 13) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT:
S/Susan J. Dlott
Susan J. Dlott
United States District Judge

2