Ward v. Box

Full title: CHRISTOPHER WARD v. TERRY BOX, ET AL

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Sherman Division

Date published: Jan 30, 2006

Civil Action No. 4:05cv157 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 4:05cv157.

January 30, 2006

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING Plaintiff'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

PAUL BROWN, Senior District Judge

Plaintiff Christopher Ward, formerly an inmate at the Collin County Detention Facility, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The court heretofore referred this matter to the Honorable Don D. Bush, United States Magistrate Judge, at Sherman, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The Magistrate Judge recommends Plaintiff's motions for injunctive relief (docket entry nos. 7, 8, 17, 18, and 20) be denied.

The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, 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.

Plaintiff has filed a notice of change of address, indicating he is no longer in custody. Plaintiff's release from the custody of the Collin County Detention Center renders Plaintiff's motions for injunctive relief moot. See Cooper v. Sheriff, Lubbock County, Texas, 929 F.2d 1078, 1084 (5th Cir. 1991). Further, Plaintiff has failed to establish that the existence of a substantial threat that irreparable harm will result if the injunction is not granted.

In addition to the above-referenced motions, Plaintiff has filed one other motion for temporary restraining order (docket entry no. 30). For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's latest motion for temporary restraining order should be denied as well.

ORDER

Accordingly, Plaintiff's 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 therefore

ORDERED that Plaintiff's motions for injunctive relief (docket entry nos. 7, 8, 17, 19, 20, and 30) are DENIED.