U.S. v. THE CONTENTS OF BANK OF AMERICA ACCOUNT NO. 9163 IN THE NAME OF COMPU-CELL, LLC, 10-0560-CG-B. (2012)
Court: District Court, S.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20120423525
Visitors: 3
Filed: Apr. 19, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 19, 2012
Summary: ORDER CALLIE V. S. GRANADE, District Judge. After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made 1 , the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that Claimant Compu-Cell, LLC's Motion to Transfer Venue to the Southern District of Florid
Summary: ORDER CALLIE V. S. GRANADE, District Judge. After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made 1 , the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that Claimant Compu-Cell, LLC's Motion to Transfer Venue to the Southern District of Florida..
More
ORDER
CALLIE V. S. GRANADE, District Judge.
After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made1, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that Claimant Compu-Cell, LLC's Motion to Transfer Venue to the Southern District of Florida Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1401(a) (Doc. 24) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Claimant's objection to the Report and Recommendation provided additional information in that it listed the names and addresses, in South Florida, of eleven witnesses whom it claims would be necessary to prove an innocent owner defense. However, the objection does not contain any details of those proposed witnesses' testimony which would allow the court to evaluate the significance of the potential testimony or whether any given witness's testimony might be duplicitous Accordingly, the court finds that the assertion adds little to the information previously provided.
Source: Leagle
