Dunham v. U.S., 1:12CR11. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. West Virginia
Number: infdco20160810d20
Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 09, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 09, 2016
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S OPINION/REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IRENE M. KEELEY , District Judge . Pending before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable Robert W. Trumble, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 42), dated July 1, 2016. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to review de novo those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. Failure to file objections to the R&R permits
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S OPINION/REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IRENE M. KEELEY , District Judge . Pending before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable Robert W. Trumble, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 42), dated July 1, 2016. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to review de novo those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. Failure to file objections to the R&R permits t..
More
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S OPINION/REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
IRENE M. KEELEY, District Judge.
Pending before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable Robert W. Trumble, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 42), dated July 1, 2016. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to review de novo those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. Failure to file objections to the R&R permits the District Court to review the recommendation under the standards that the District Court believes are appropriate, and under these circumstances, the parties' right to de novo review is waived. See Webb v. Califano, 468 F.Supp. 825 (E.D. Cal. 1979). To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the review is for clear error. Id.
Upon review of the R&R and the record, the Court adopts the opinion of the Magistrate Judge for the reasons discussed in the R&R (Dkt. No. 42). Therefore, the Court:
1. ADOPTS the R&R (Dkt. No. 42);
2. DENIES the petitioner's § 2255 motion (Dkt. No. 1); and
3. DISMISSES this civil action WITH PREJUDICE and ORDERS that it be STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to enter a separate judgment order and to transmit copies of both orders to counsel of record and to the pro se petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested.
Source: Leagle
