Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jimenez v. Warden of Ridgeland Correctional Institution, 6:18-cv-02793-TLW. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. South Carolina Number: infdco20190128a94 Visitors: 25
Filed: Jan. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 25, 2019
Summary: ORDER TERRY L. WOOTEN , Chief District Judge . Petitioner Alejandro Licona Jimenez seeks relief from his state sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. ECF No. 1. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by United States Magistrate Judge McDonald, ECF No. 14, to whom this case was previously assigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), (D.S.C.). In the R&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends dismi
More

ORDER

Petitioner Alejandro Licona Jimenez seeks relief from his state sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by United States Magistrate Judge McDonald, ECF No. 14, to whom this case was previously assigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), (D.S.C.). In the R&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing Petitioner's case pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with a court order and for failure to prosecute the case. On November 29, 2018, the Court mailed Petitioner a copy of the R&R. ECF No. 16. No objections have been filed.

This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Report to which a specific objection is registered and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of objections to the R&R, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

In light of the standard above, this Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge's R&R. Noting that Petitioner filed no objections, the R&R, ECF No. 14, is hereby ACCEPTED. Therefore, for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, Petitioner's case is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer