Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Knox v. Rhodes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


April 6, 2010

CHRISTOPHER KNOX, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DR. KELLY RHODES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 128) of February 18, 2010, wherein Magistrate Judge Philip M. Frazier recommends that the Court grant Defendant Rakesh Chandre's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 100). In the instant motion, Chandre asks that the Court dismiss all class action and preliminary injunction claims against him.

After reviewing a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the Court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations of the magistrate judge in the report. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court has discretion to conduct a new hearing and may consider the record before the magistrate judge anew or receive any further evidence deemed necessary. Id.

The Court must review de novo the portions of the report to which specific written objections are made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). "If no objection or only partial objection is made, the district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error." Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). The time for objections has passed, yet none have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is subject to a clear error standard of review.

The Court has reviewed the entire file and finds that the R&R is not clearly erroneous, dictating dismissal of Knox's class action claims against Chandre. However, the Court notes that the R&R does not reference Knox's preliminary injunction claims, which Chandre also seeks to dismiss. Given that Knox did not respond to the instant dismissal motion, the Court deems the merits therein to be admitted. See S.D. Ill. L. R. 7.1(c). This, in conjunction with the fact that a preliminary injunction was previously denied, (see Doc. 63), requires that the preliminary injunction claims against Chandre be dismissed as well.

For the foregoing reasons, the Court ADOPTS the R&R (Doc. 128) as modified herein, which GRANTS Chandre's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 100). Specifically, the Court DISMISSES with prejudice all of the class action and preliminary injunction claims against Chandre.

IT IS SO ORDERED

20100406

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.