Wilson v. U.S., 1:11CV972. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20160505b80
Visitors: 13
Filed: May 04, 2016
Latest Update: May 04, 2016
Summary: ORDER N. CARLTON TILLEY, Jr. , Senior District Judge . On February 1, 2013, the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636. No objections were filed within the time limits prescribed by Section 636. Therefore, the Court need not make a de novo review and the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation [Doc. #6] is hereby adopted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's untimely Objections [Doc. #5] to the Magistrate
Summary: ORDER N. CARLTON TILLEY, Jr. , Senior District Judge . On February 1, 2013, the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636. No objections were filed within the time limits prescribed by Section 636. Therefore, the Court need not make a de novo review and the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation [Doc. #6] is hereby adopted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's untimely Objections [Doc. #5] to the Magistrate J..
More
ORDER
N. CARLTON TILLEY, Jr., Senior District Judge.
On February 1, 2013, the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. No objections were filed within the time limits prescribed by Section 636. Therefore, the Court need not make a de novo review and the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation [Doc. #6] is hereby adopted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's untimely Objections [Doc. #5] to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
