Galindo v. United States, 1:11CR124-2. (2020)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20200128c79
Filed: Jan. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2020
Summary: ORDER N. CARLTON TILLEY, JR. , Senior District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and, on December 4, 2018, was mailed to the parties in this action. [Docs. #171, #172.] Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. 636. [Doc. #173.] The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which objection was m
Summary: ORDER N. CARLTON TILLEY, JR. , Senior District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and, on December 4, 2018, was mailed to the parties in this action. [Docs. #171, #172.] Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. 636. [Doc. #173.] The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which objection was ma..
More
ORDER
N. CARLTON TILLEY, JR., Senior District Judge.
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and, on December 4, 2018, was mailed to the parties in this action. [Docs. #171, #172.] Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 636. [Doc. #173.]
The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate Judge's report. The Court therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is filed and dismissed sua sponte for failure to obtain certification for this § 2255 application by filing a Motion for Authorization in the court of appeals as required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255 and 2244 and Fourth Circuit Local Rule 22(d).
Source: Leagle
