Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-01676/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-01676-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Christopher Tinsley, 

Plaintiff, 

v.

Dora B. Schriro, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-1676 PHX-NVW (CRP)

ORDER

Pending before the court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of

Magistrate Judge Pyle (Doc. # 28) regarding Plaintiff’s Request for Preventative

Relief/Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 5). The Request arises out of Plaintiff’s claim

against Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The R&R recommends that the Request be

denied. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had ten days to file objections

to the R&R. (R&R at 11 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)). Plaintiff filed objections through

counsel on July 11, 2008. (Doc. # 30.) 

The court has considered the objections and the entire record, briefs, evidence, and

transcript of hearing concerning the Request, and has reviewed the Report and

Recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that

the court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and

Case 2:07-cv-01676-NVW Document 31 Filed 07/15/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

Recommendation to which specific objections are made). The court agrees with the

Magistrate Judge's determinations, accepts the recommended decision within the meaning

of Rule 72(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., and overrules Petitioner's objections. See 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in

part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of

Magistrate Judge Pyle (Doc. 28 ) is accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Request for Preventative

Relief/Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 5) is denied. This action remains referred to

Magistrate Judge Pyle.

DATED this 14th day of July, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01676-NVW Document 31 Filed 07/15/08 Page 2 of 2