Harrington v. State of Oregon et al

Filing 80

ORDER: Adopting Judge Clarke's Findings and Recommendation 68 . Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 59 with prejudice and without leave to amend. Denying Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order 77 . Signed on 6/7/2017 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (Copy mailed to plaintiff) (cp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
GARY ALLEN HARRINGTON,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:16-cv-00200-CL

v.

ORDER

LARRY PAUL MENTEER, et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________
MCSHANE, Judge:
Before the court are two matters: (1) Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke’s Report and
Recommendation (ECF No. 68), and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
(ECF No. 77).
Because Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 76), I
have reviewed the file of this case de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); McDonnell Douglas
Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). I conclude the report

1 –ORDER

is correct and adopt its findings and recommendation. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No.
59) is GRANTED with prejudice and without leave to amend.
Plaintiff also moved for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 77). Because I find the
Plaintiff failed to establish by a clear showing that: (1) he is likely to succeed on the merits; (3)
he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief; and (3) the balance of
equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest, the motion for
Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 7th day of June, 2017.

_____/s/ Michael J. McShane_____
Michael J. McShane
United States District Judge

2 –ORDER