Kensu v. Borgerding, M.D. et al, No. 4:2016cv13505 - Document 153 (E.D. Mich. 2018)

Court Description: OPINION and ORDER Adopting Magistrate Judge's 146 Report and Recommendation, and Denying Plaintiff's 101 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunctive Relief. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (RLou)

Download PDF
Kensu v. Borgerding, M.D. et al Doc. 153 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TEMUJIN KENSU, Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 16-13505 Honorable Linda V. Parker v. WILLIAM BORGERDING, M.D., et al. Defendants. ______________________/ OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S OCTOBER 31, 2018 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF NO. 146] AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF [ECF NO. 101] This matter presently is before the Court on Plaintiff’s “Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunctive Relief.” (ECF No. 101.) The matter has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis for all pretrial proceedings, including a hearing and determination of all nondispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF No. 30.) Magistrate Judge Davis held a hearing with respect to Plaintiff’s motion on May 2 and June 7, 2018, by which time the only issue remaining in Plaintiff’s motion was the manner his prescription for Cialis was dispensed to him (i.e., it was dispensed at health care but Plaintiff wanted to keep 1 Dockets.Justia.com the medication on his person) and whether to provide a medical monitor to oversee his care. On October 31, 2018, Magistrate Judge Davis issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) recommending that the Court deny Plaintiff’s motion. (ECF No. 146.) At the conclusion of the R&R, Magistrate Judge Davis advises the parties that they may object to and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service upon them. (Id. at Pg ID 3693-94.) She further specifically advises the parties that “[f]ailure to timely file objections constitutes a waiver of any further right to appeal.” (Id. at Pg ID 3693.) The parties stipulated to extend the time to November 21, 2018 for Plaintiff to file objections to the R&R (see ECF No. 147). Nevertheless, neither party filed objections to the R&R. The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Davis. The Court therefore adopts the R&R. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s emergency motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (ECF No. 101) is DENIED. s/ Linda V. Parker LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: December 12, 2018 2 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, December 12, 2018, by electronic and/or U.S. First Class mail. s/ R. Loury Case Manager 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.