UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ELIJAH DECOLE WOODS, § § Plaintiff, § § versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:24-CV-244 § BRYAN COLLIER, et al., § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Elijah Decole Woods, an inmate formerly confined at the Stiles Unit, proceeding pro se, brought this lawsuit pursuant to

. The court referred this matter to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge recommends denying plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available evidence. Plaintiff filed objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. This requires a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration, the court concludes plaintiff’s objections are without merit. As set forth in the Report, plaintiff’s transfer to another unit rendered his claims for injunctive relief moot. See Herman v. Holiday,

(5th Cir. 2001); Cooper v. Sheriff, Lubbock Cnty., Texas,

(5th Cir. 1991). Further, plaintiff has not clearly carried his burden of establishing either that a substantial threat exists that irreparable harm will result if relief is not granted or that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. See Planned Parenthood of Hous. & Se. Tex. v. Sanchez,

(Sth Cir. 2005). The defendants have filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Due to its extraordinary character, injunctive relief should not be granted unless the party seeking relief has clearly carried the burden of persuasion as to all four elements. PCT Transp., Inc. v. Fort Worth & W. R.R. Co.,

(Sth Cir. 2005). ORDER Accordingly, plaintiffs objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED. It is ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order (#4) is DENIED.

SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 12th day of March, 2025.

PNww be Orne. MARCIA A.CRONE- UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE