David v. Crow et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JEROME ADRIAN DAVID, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	Case No. CIV-21-534-SLP
)
SCOTT CROW, et al., 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
O R D E R
Before the Court is the Supplemental Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 77]
of United States Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell. 	Judge Purcell again recommends
denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunctive Relief [Doc. No. 50] on grounds his request for
injunctive relief is moot because Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at the facilities where
his claims for injunctive relief arose. 1 Judge Purcell advised Plaintiff of his right to file an
objection and further advised Plaintiff that failure to do so would result in a waiver of
appellate review of the recommended ruling.
On June 27, 2022, Plaintiff sought an extension of time within which to file his
objection to the Supplemental Report and Recommendation and was granted an extension
of time until July 20, 2022 in which to do so. See Order [Doc. No. 94]. A review of the
Court’s docket shows that Plaintiff has not timely filed an objection to the Supplemental
Report and Recommendation, nor has he sought any further extension of time within which
1 Judge Purcell previously entered a Supplemental Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 51]
addressing Plaintiff’s Motion, which the undersigned declined to adopt. See Order [Doc. No. 66].
Case 5:21-cv-00534-SLP Document 113 Filed 08/11/22 Page 1 of 2

2
to do so. 	Therefore, the Supplemental Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 77] is
ADOPTED and Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunctive Relief [Doc No. 50] is DENIED AS
MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 11 th day of August, 2022.
Case 5:21-cv-00534-SLP Document 113 Filed 08/11/22 Page 2 of 2