Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-445
04-23-2012
MICHAEL TYRONE McCULLON, Plaintiff, v. LIEUTENANT M. SAYLOR, et al., Defendants.
(Judge Kosik)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
AND NOW, THIS 23th DAY OF APRIL, 2012, IT APPEARING TO THE COURT THAT:
(1) Plaintiff, Michael Tyrone McCullon, a prisoner confined at the United States Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, filed the instant civil rights action on March 12, 2012. Along with his complaint, plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 2);
(2) The action was assigned to Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson for Report and Recommendation;
(3) On March 19, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11) wherein he recommended that the plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 2) be denied;
(4) Specifically, the Magistrate Judge found that plaintiff failed to demonstrate factors which would warrant injunctive relief;
(5) Petitioner has failed to file timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation;
AND, IT FURTHER APPEARING THAT:
(6) If no objections are filed to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the plaintiff is not statutorily entitled to a de novo review of his claims. 28 U.S.C.A.§636(b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn. 474 U.S. 140, 150-53 (1985). Nonetheless, the usual practice of the district court is to give "reasoned consideration" to a magistrate judge's report prior to adopting it. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987);
(7) We have considered the Magistrate Judge's Report and we concur with his recommendation;
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
(1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson dated March 19, 2012 (Doc. 11) is ADOPTED;
(2) The plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 2) is DENIED; and
(3) The above-captioned action is remanded to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
_____________
Edwin M. Kosik
United States District Judge