From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spates v. Douglas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION
Jan 13, 2020
NO. 3:18-cv-01305 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 13, 2020)

Opinion

NO. 3:18-cv-01305

01-13-2020

JOHN SPATES, Plaintiff, v. DARREN DOUGLAS, Defendant.


ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. No. 25), to which no Objections have been filed.

The failure to object to a report and recommendation releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. Frias v. Frias, No. 2:18-cv-00076, 2019 WL 549506, at * 2 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 12, 2019); Hart v. Bee Property Mgmt., Case No. 18-cv-11851, 2019 WL 1242372, at * 1 (E.D. Mich. March 18, 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). The district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, those aspects of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made. Ashraf v. Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc., 322 F. Supp. 3d 879, 881 (W.D. Tenn. 2018); Benson v. Walden Security, Case No. 3:18-cv-0010, 2018 WL 6322332, at * 3 (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 4, 2018). The district court should adopt the magistrate judge's findings and rulings to which no specific objection is filed. Id.

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the file. The Report and Recommendation is adopted and approved. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion Requesting an Injunction (Doc. No. 24) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/_________

ELI RICHARDSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Spates v. Douglas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION
Jan 13, 2020
NO. 3:18-cv-01305 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 13, 2020)
Case details for

Spates v. Douglas

Case Details

Full title:JOHN SPATES, Plaintiff, v. DARREN DOUGLAS, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Date published: Jan 13, 2020

Citations

NO. 3:18-cv-01305 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 13, 2020)