Eads v. State of Tennessee et al
Filing
107
ORDER: denying 46 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying 71 Motion to Strike; adopting Report and Recommendations re 98 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge William L. Campbell, Jr on 6/12/2019. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
MITCHELL EADS,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF TENNESSEE, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:18-cv-00042
JUDGE CAMPBELL
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FRENSLEY
ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) on Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. No. 46) and Motion to Strike
(Doc. No. 71.) The Magistrate Judge recommends that the motions be denied. (Doc. No. 98.)
In the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. No. 46) Plaintiff seeks an order
requiring Defendants provide him with law books and legal reference materials while he is in
segregation in TCIX. Defendants argued that the motion is moot because Plaintiff has been
transferred to another facility and is no longer housed at TCIX. (Doc. No. 60.) Plaintiff filed
a Motion to Strike Defendant’s Response arguing that the response is “immaterial and
impertinent.” (Doc. No. 71.) The Magistrate Judge recommends denying Plaintiff’s motions.
The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that any objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s findings were to be filed within fourteen days of service. (Doc. No. 98 at
4-5.) No objections were filed.
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 98) and concludes
that it should be ADOPTED and APPROVED.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs Motion for a
Preliminary Injunction (Doc. No. 46) and Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 71) are
DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.
_________________________________
WILLIAM L. CAMPBELL, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?