U.S. v. NGUYEN, 2:08-cr-0389 GEB AC (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150505a19
Visitors: 2
Filed: May 01, 2015
Latest Update: May 01, 2015
Summary: ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a pro se Motion for the Return of Seized Property pursuant to Rule 41(g), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. ECF No. 226. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(b)(6). ECF No. 227, 228. On March 19, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice t
Summary: ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a pro se Motion for the Return of Seized Property pursuant to Rule 41(g), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. ECF No. 226. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(b)(6). ECF No. 227, 228. On March 19, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to..
More
ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a pro se Motion for the Return of Seized Property pursuant to Rule 41(g), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. ECF No. 226. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(b)(6). ECF No. 227, 228.
On March 19, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 237. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed March 19, 2015, are adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss, ECF. No. 218, is granted; and
3. Defendant's motion for return of property, ECF No. 212, is denied.
Source: Leagle
