United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division
June 2, 2015
Robert D. Sango, # 252200, Plaintiff,
R. Ault, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
PAUL L. MALONEY, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
There are three pending motions for temporary restraining orders in this lawsuit. (ECF Nos. 50, 52, and 56.) The magistrate judge issued a report recommending all three motions be denied. (ECF No. 61.) No objections have been filed.
Plaintiff Sango is a prisoner. He has multiple pending lawsuits asserting claims for violations of his civil rights. He is proceeding without counsel in all of them. As has happened in the past, some of the documents he mails to the Clerk get filed on the wrong docket. Here, two of the three motions identify Defendant Ault in the caption and include this docket number. (ECF Nos. 50 and 56.) The third motion for a temporary restraining order does not include any docket number and identifies a different defendant in the caption. (ECF No. 52.) The defendant identified in that caption is “(Unknown) Watkins.” Plaintiff currently maintains a different lawsuit against that defendant. See Sango v. Watkins, 1:15-cv-221 (W.D. Mich.).
Therefore, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED IN PART AND MODIFIED IN PART as the opinion of this Court. The Court adopts the portions of the report that relate to docket entries 50 and 56. Those two motions are DENIED. Docket entries 52 and 53 were inadvertently filed in this case. The Report and Recommendation must be modified to clarify that docket entry 52 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall file Docket Entries 52 and 53 in Sango v. Watkins, 1:15-cv-221 (W.D. Mich.). IT IS SO ORDERED.