Holtzclaw v. Morales et al

Filing 36

ORDER re 35 Affidavit, 34 Objection to Report and Recommendations filed by Loyd W. Holtzclaw. The Court adopted the Report and Recommendation on February 27, 2017. (Doc. 32. ) However, the Court will construe Plaintiff's objection and af fidavit as requests for reconsideration and review the report and recommendation in light of these objections. After a careful de novo review of the record and Plaintiff's objections, the Court sees no reason to disturb its prior order adopting the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Plaintiff's request is DENIED. Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr on 5/19/17. (jlm)

Download PDF
* ■-' p t f ^/ "' ' ' IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR - THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION LOYD W. {g Pf| 03 ' * HOLTZCLAW, Plaintiff, CASE NO. V, WARDEN JOSE MORALES JACKSON, CV416-068 and MR. Unit Manager, Defendants. ORDER Before Report March and 6, which was be the 2017, and to the affidavit After Plaintiff's the 2017. Recommendation report and a as Court (Doc. prior for order Judge's novo the filed (Doc. These documents on 35) appear to February 1, to which were 27, 2017. Plaintiff's reconsideration in was to 2017 due by The Court adopted that Report construe recommendation de which objections February will Objection Second Affidavit 2017. 31. ) on requests careful 34) Magistrate Plaintiff's objections, its (Doc. and recommendation, However, Plaintiff's filed on May 18, February 15, and is Recommendation objections report Court light review of of (Doc. objection and and these the 32. ) review the objections. record and the Court sees no reason to disturb adopting the report and recommendation of

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?