Robinson v. Brantley et al

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, to which no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. No. 14 .) The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and c onducted a de novo review of the record. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED as modified. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction Relief Hearing (Doc. No. 10 ), construed only as a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order because it was filed without service to Defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b), is DENIED. The denial is without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a motion for a preliminary injunction after he serves Defendants, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a). IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 3/21/2017. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(hb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
COLUMBIA DIVISION
MICHAEL D. ROBINSON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
SEAN BRANTLEY, et. al,
Defendants.

NO. 1:16-cv-00095
JUDGE CRENSHAW

ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, to
which no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. No. 14.) The Court has reviewed the Report
and Recommendation and conducted a de novo review of the record. The Report and
Recommendation is ADOPTED as modified.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunction Relief Hearing (Doc. No. 10), construed
only as a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order because it was filed without service to
Defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b), is DENIED. The denial is without
prejudice to Plaintiff filing a motion for a preliminary injunction after he serves Defendants, under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

____________________________________
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE