From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stroup v. Bishop

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Jan 17, 2008
3:07-CV-99-BES-VPC (D. Nev. Jan. 17, 2008)

Opinion

3:07-CV-99-BES-VPC.

January 17, 2008


ORDER


Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (#42) filed on November 7, 2007, in which the Magistrate Judge recommends that this Court enter an order denying Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction (Doc #16) filed June 27, 2007. Plaintiff filed his Objections to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations (Doc #44) on November 21, 2007. Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff's Objections to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations (Doc #46) on December 6, 2007.

Also, before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc #49) filed on December 20, 2007, in which the Magistrate Judge recommends that this Court enter an order granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint (Doc #14) filed on June 15, 2007, Defendants Bishop, D'Amico, and McDaniel's Motion to Dismiss (Doc #17/19) filed July 9, 2007, be granted in part as to Defendant D'Amico and denied in part as to Defendants Bishop and McDaniel; and Plaintiff's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc #30) be denied. Plaintiff filed his Objections to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc #51) on January 14, 2008. Defendants filed their Response to Objections to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations (Doc #52) on January 16, 2008.

The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record in this case, considering fully all relevant matters of record pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(B)(1)(b) and Local Rule IB 3-2. After a review and determination in accordance with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and applicable case law, and good cause appearing,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc #42) entered on November 7, 2007, is adopted and accepted without modification. Thus, in accordance with the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction (Doc #16) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc #49) entered December 20, 2007, is adopted and accepted without modification. Thus, in accordance with the Report and Recommendation,

1. Defendants MacArthur and Williamson's Motion to Dismiss (Doc #14) is GRANTED;

2. Defendants Bishop, D'Amico, and McDaniel's Motion to Dismiss (Doc #17/19) be GRANTED IN PART as to Defendant D'Amico and DENIED IN PART as to Defendants Bishop and McDaniel; and

3. Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc #30) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Stroup v. Bishop

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Jan 17, 2008
3:07-CV-99-BES-VPC (D. Nev. Jan. 17, 2008)
Case details for

Stroup v. Bishop

Case Details

Full title:BOBBY JEHU STROUP, Plaintiff, v. T. BISHOP, S. MacARTHUR, L. WILLIAMSON…

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Jan 17, 2008

Citations

3:07-CV-99-BES-VPC (D. Nev. Jan. 17, 2008)