From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conghua Yan v. Taylor

United States District Court, Northern District of Texas
Jun 12, 2023
CIVIL 4:23-CV-288-P (N.D. Tex. Jun. 12, 2023)

Opinion

CIVIL 4:23-CV-288-P

06-12-2023

CONGHUA YAN v. MARK A. TAYLOR, ET AL.


FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

JEFFREY L. CURETON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order [doc. 33], filed June 9,2023. Having carefully reviewed, the motion, the Court finds, concludes and recommends that the motion be DENIED because, inter ali, Plaintiff has failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1) as required for the Court to issue a TRO without written or oral notice.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO OBJECT TO PROPOSED FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION AND CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO OBJECT

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), each party to this action has the right to serve and file specific written objections in the United States District Court to the United States Magistrate Judge's proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation within fourteen (14) days after the party has been served with a copy of this document. The United States District Judge need only make a de novo determination of those portions of the United States Magistrate Judge's proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation to which specific objection is timely made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Failure to file, by the date stated above, a specific written objection to a proposed factual finding or legal conclusion will bar a party, except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice, from attacking on appeal any such proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the United States District Judge. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass 'n,79 F,3d 1415,1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).

ORDER

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636, it is hereby ORDERED that each party is granted until June 26, 2023 to serve and file written objections to the United States Magistrate Judge's proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation. It is further ORDERED that if objections are filed and the opposing party chooses to file a response, the response shall be filed within seven (7) days of the filing date of the objections.


Summaries of

Conghua Yan v. Taylor

United States District Court, Northern District of Texas
Jun 12, 2023
CIVIL 4:23-CV-288-P (N.D. Tex. Jun. 12, 2023)
Case details for

Conghua Yan v. Taylor

Case Details

Full title:CONGHUA YAN v. MARK A. TAYLOR, ET AL.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of Texas

Date published: Jun 12, 2023

Citations

CIVIL 4:23-CV-288-P (N.D. Tex. Jun. 12, 2023)