United States v. Hunter, 3:06-cr-061 (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20191231c69
Visitors: 6
Filed: Dec. 29, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2019
Summary: RECOMMITTAL ORDER THOMAS M. ROSE , District Judge . This case is before the Court on Defendant's Objections (ECF No. 291) to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations on Hunter's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 288). The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate
Summary: RECOMMITTAL ORDER THOMAS M. ROSE , District Judge . This case is before the Court on Defendant's Objections (ECF No. 291) to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations on Hunter's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 288). The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate J..
More
RECOMMITTAL ORDER
THOMAS M. ROSE, District Judge.
This case is before the Court on Defendant's Objections (ECF No. 291) to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations on Hunter's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 288).
The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate Judge with instructions to file a supplemental opinion analyzing the Objections and making recommendations based on that analysis.
Source: Leagle
