Pilati v. United States of America

Filing 19

MEMORANDUM OPINION; The Court is of the Opinion that the Magistrate Judge's 11 Report is hereby ADOPTED and his 11 Recommendation is ACCEPTED. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/29/2016. (JLC)

Download PDF
FILED 2016 Jul-29 PM 01:02 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHWESTERN DIVISION JOHN PILATI, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Respondent. ) 3:12-cv-08012-VEH-JEO 3:07-cr-00082-VEH-JEO MEMORANDUM OPINION This case is a counseled “Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Conviction and Sentence” filed by the petitioner, John Pilati (“Petitioner”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The motion was referred to a magistrate judge for report and recommendation.1 The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation recommending that the motion be denied. Petitioner filed objections. The Government filed a notice of no objections. Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge’s report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and his 1 The magistrate judge to whom the motion was referred was, by consent of the parties, the trial judge in the underlying criminal action. recommendation is ACCEPTED. The Court EXPRESSLY REJECTS all of Petitioner’s objections and finds no objected-to errors in the report and recommendation.2 Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion is due to be DENIED and the petition is due to be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A Final Judgment Order will be entered.3 DONE this the 29th day of July, 2016. VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS United States District Judge 2 Which is the standard of review, as it is the objecting party’s obligation to make their objections with specificity. While Petitioner clearly disagrees with almost every aspect of the sixty-four page report and recommendation (doc. 11) in his forty-three page objections (doc. 14), the court finds no merit in any of the objections. 3 The court had concerns about its jurisdiction in this case (see doc. 16), but finds that it has such jurisdiction for the reasons set out in the Government’s response (doc. 18). 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?