Opinion
Case No. 4:04-cv-00105-MP-AK.
June 20, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Doc. 61, Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Doc. 52, be denied. The Magistrate Judge filed the Report and Recommendation on Monday, April 10, 2006. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo review of those portions to which an objection has been made. Plaintiff has filed objections to the Magistrate's Report, Doc. 62.
Having considered the Report and Recommendation and all objections thereto filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. The Court agrees with the reasoning in the Magistrate's report and its conclusion that there is not a substantial likelihood that Plaintiff will succeed on the merits of his motion. Thus, the Magistrate was correct in his recommendation that the motion for preliminary injunctive relief be denied. While there may be some merit to Plaintiff's claims, in exercising its discretion the court hereby finds that "the extraordinary and drastic remedy" of a preliminary injunction is not appropriate in this case. See Carillon Importers, Ltd. v. Frank Pesce Intern. Group Ltd., 112 F.3d 1125, 1126 (11th Cir. 1997); United States v. Jefferson County, 720 F.2d 1511, 1519 (11th Cir. 1983).
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Doc. 52, is denied.
DONE AND ORDERED.