Buy This Entire Record For
Juste v. Columbia Regional Care Center
United States District Court, D. South Carolina
December 7, 2016
Andre Juste, #078-361-619, Plaintiff,
Columbia Regional Care Center, Correct Care Solutions, Dr. Vernelle Fogle, Dr. Cynthia McFadden, Brice McClease, Ronald Lawrence, Rose, Nancy Crawford, Individuals, Medical Staff, Nurses, Volunteers, Individuals, Medical Staff, Security Custody Officer Staff, Patients, Individual Patients, South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Director of Accreditation on National Commission o Correctional Health, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Georgia Department of Corrections, Individual Patients, C.D.C., U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
E. Rogers, III, United States Magistrate Judge
a civil rights action filed by a pro se litigant who
indicates that he is an immigration detainee. Because
Petitioner cannot leave the facility where he is detained on
his own, in the event that a limitations issue arises,
Petitioner shall have the benefit of the holding in
Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (prisoner's
pleading was filed at the moment of delivery to prison
authorities for forwarding to District Court). Under Local
Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) of the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, pretrial proceedings in
this action have been referred to the assigned United States
Magistrate Judge. An immigration detainee may be considered a
prisoner or a nonprisoner depending if the detainment is due
to improper entry(criminal) or unlawful presence(civil).
See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324d, 1325. The court is
without information to determine whether Plaintiff is
detained under criminal charges or civil penalties, and thus,
treats Plaintiff as having the status of a nonprisoner.
case is not in proper form and the undersigned has issued
separately a third proper form order directing Plaintiff to
bring this case into proper form.
November 16, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Petition for Permanent
Injunction. Plaintiff's Motion is unclear as to what
specific relief he is seeking. He states that his request is
for an injunction against all Defendants to secure his
constitutional rights from being violated.
preliminary injunction is “an extraordinary and drastic
remedy.” Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 689
(2008). To obtain a preliminary injunction, a movant must
demonstrate “ that he is likely to succeed on the
merits,  that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in
the absence of preliminary relief,  that the balance of
equities tips in his favor, and  that an injunction is in
the public interest” Winter v. Natural Res. Def.
Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Plaintiff has
failed to allege that he meets all four elements under the
Winter standard. Therefore, it is recommended that
his Motion be denied. (ECF No. 27).
therefore, RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Motion be denied.
(ECF No. 27).
attention is directed to the important notice on the next
of Right to File Objections to Report and
parties are advised that they may file specific written
objections to this Report and Recommendation with the
District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the
portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections
are made and the basis for such objections. “[I]n the
absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need
not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of
the record in order to accept the recommendation.'”
Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416
F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory
written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of
the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing
Robin L. Blume, Clerk United States District Court Post
Office Box 2317 Florence, South Carolina 29503
to timely file specific written objections to this Report and
Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal
from a judgment of the District Court based upon such
Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins,