PATE v. JOSEPH

Filing 9

ORDER. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF Doc. 7 ) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. The petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Petitioners failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. The Clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 1/10/2022. (alb)

Download PDF
Case 3:21-cv-01049-MCR-HTC Document 9 Filed 01/10/22 Page 1 of 2 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION FRANK EDWIN PATE, Petitioner, v. Case No. 3:21cv1049-MCR-HTC M V JOSEPH WARDEN, Respondent. _________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation dated December 13, 2021 (ECF No. 7), which recommends this case be dismissed sua sponte for Petitioner’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Petitioner was furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all timely filed objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation and any duly filed objections, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Case 3:21-cv-01049-MCR-HTC Document 9 Filed 01/10/22 Page 2 of 2 Page 2 of 2 Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: (1) The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF Doc. 7) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. (2) The petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Petitioner’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. (3) The Clerk is directed to close the file. DONE AND ORDERED this 10th day of January 2022. M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case No. 3:21cv1049-MCR-HTC

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?