IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
July 28, 2010
ERIC LYONS, PLAINTIFF
JEFFREY BEARD, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner
AND NOW, this 28th day of July, 2010, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 112) of the magistrate judge, recommending that plaintiff Eric Lyons's ("Lyons") motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 94) be denied, and, following an independent review of the record, it appearing that a preliminary injunction "is an extraordinary and drastic remedy," see Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997), that four factors govern whether a preliminary injunction should be granted, see Highmark, Inc. v. UPMC Health Plan, Inc., 276 F.3d 160, 170-71 (3d Cir. 2001), and that Lyons bears the burden of demonstrating irreparable injury, see Hohe v. Casey, 868 F.2d 69, 72 (3d Cir. 1989), and concluding that Lyons has not shown a reasonable probability of success on the merits,*fn1 (see Doc. 112 at 6-8), and that Lyons has not shown that he will be irreparably harmed if denied relief, (see id. at 9), and it further appearing that neither party has filed objections to the magistrate judge's report, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record,*fn2 see Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (explaining that "failing to timely object to [a report and recommendation] in a civil proceeding may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level"), it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The report and recommendation (Doc. 112) of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED.
2. The motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 94) is DENIED.
3. The above-captioned case is REMANDED to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge