Solomon v. Michigan Department of Corrections

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

MARTIN ANTONIO SOLOMON, 2:19-cv-12354

Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT v. AND RECOMMENDATION MICHIGAN DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., Defendant. This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s Report and Recommendation of October 19, 2020 (ECF No. 104) recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunctive Relief (ECF No. 66) be DENIED. The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. The law provides that either party may serve and file written objections “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy” of a report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district court will make a “de novo determination of those portions of the report… to which objection is made.” Id. Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the record. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985). The Court will therefore accept the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation of October

19, 2020 as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Whalen’s Report and Recommendation of October 19, 2020 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunctive Relief is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 17, 2020 s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE