Jackson v. Schnell
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
Jackson v. Schnell
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Tony Dejuan Jackson, Case No. 23-cv-3827 (KMM/DLM)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
Paul Schnell, Jo Ann Erickson, and
William Bolin,
Defendants.
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
of Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko dated March 26, 2024. [R&R, ECF No. 34]. In the
R&R, Judge Micko recommended that Plaintiff Dejuan Jackson’s motion for a temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction [ECF No. 11] be denied. The R&R clearly
and precisely sets forth the factual background relevant to Mr. Jackson’s motion and as
such, said background is not repeated here. To date, no objections have been made to the
R&R by Mr. Jackson, and the deadline for filing such objections has since passed.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are
made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted Cnty.,563 F. Supp. 3d 946
, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), and Grinder v. Gammon,73 F.3d 793, 795
(8th Cir.
1996) (per curiam)). The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and finds no error.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation
[ECF. No. 34] is ACCEPTED and Plaintiff Dejuan Jackson’s Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 11] is DENIED.
Date: May 6, 2024 s/Katherine Menendez
Katherine Menendez
United States District Court
2 Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Tony Dejuan Jackson, Case No. 23-cv-3827 (KMM/DLM)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
Paul Schnell, Jo Ann Erickson, and
William Bolin,
Defendants.
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
of Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko dated March 26, 2024. [R&R, ECF No. 34]. In the
R&R, Judge Micko recommended that Plaintiff Dejuan Jackson’s motion for a temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction [ECF No. 11] be denied. The R&R clearly
and precisely sets forth the factual background relevant to Mr. Jackson’s motion and as
such, said background is not repeated here. To date, no objections have been made to the
R&R by Mr. Jackson, and the deadline for filing such objections has since passed.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are
made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted Cnty.,563 F. Supp. 3d 946
, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), and Grinder v. Gammon,73 F.3d 793, 795
(8th Cir.
1996) (per curiam)). The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and finds no error.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation
[ECF. No. 34] is ACCEPTED and Plaintiff Dejuan Jackson’s Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 11] is DENIED.
Date: May 6, 2024 s/Katherine Menendez
Katherine Menendez
United States District Court
2 Reference
- Status
- Unknown