ARIAS-JOVEL v. HOLDER, CV 11-10109-TJH(CW). (2013)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20130826469
Visitors: 6
Filed: Aug. 23, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 23, 2013
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE TERRY J. HATTER, Jr., District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, Petitioner's Objections, Respondents' Reply, and the Supplemental Report and Recommendation. The court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection has been made. The court
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE TERRY J. HATTER, Jr., District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, Petitioner's Objections, Respondents' Reply, and the Supplemental Report and Recommendation. The court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection has been made. The court a..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TERRY J. HATTER, Jr., District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, Petitioner's Objections, Respondents' Reply, and the Supplemental Report and Recommendation. The court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection has been made. The court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED as follows:
1. This action is dismissed, without prejudice, as moot, insofar as Petitioner is seeking a bond hearing after having had such a hearing in accordance with due process of law.
2. The petition is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of jurisdiction insofar as Petitioner challenging the Immigration Court's decision denying bond after his second hearing.
3. Judgment shall be entered accordingly.
Source: Leagle
