Summary
holding that challenges to insourcing decisions were governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b) and stating that RCG is “a situation fundamentally different from the one presented here”
Summary of this case from Fisher–Cal Indus., Inc. v. United StatesOpinion
Case No. 10-14162-CIV-GRAHAM/LYNCH.
August 18, 2010
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [D.E. 15] and Plaintiff's Applications for Temporary Restraining Order [D.E. 25] and for Preliminary Injunction [D.E. 3].
THE MATTER was referred to the Honorable United States Magistrate Judge Frank J. Lynch pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Magistrate Rules for the Southern District of Florida [D.E. 7, 27]. Judge Lynch issued a Report and Recommendation [D.E. 29] recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss be granted for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and that Plaintiff's applications for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction be denied without prejudice. Plaintiff has filed objections to the report.
THE COURT has conducted an independent review of the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Based thereon, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Magistrate Judge's Report [D.E. 29] is AFFIRMED, ADOPTED AND RATIFIED in its entirety. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [D.E. 15] is GRANTED. This matter is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Applications for Temporary Restraining Order [D.E. 25] and Preliminary Injunction [D.E. 3] is DENIED without prejudice. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is CLOSED and any pending motions are DENIED as moot.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 17th day of August, 2010.