Escobar v. Lynch et al

Filing 21

EO: COURT ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241. adopting Report and Recommendations re 14 F indings and Recommendations.; DOP=3/29/2017. (JUDGE LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI)(wnn, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

MINUTES

CASE NUMBER:

CIVIL NO. 16-00683LEK-RLP

CASE NAME:

Jose Jacobo Escobar, Petitioner vs. Loretta E. Lynch
United States Attorney General, Respondent, et al.

ATTYS FOR PLA:
ATTYS FOR DEFT:
INTERPRETER:

JUDGE:

Leslie E. Kobayashi

REPORTER:

DATE:

03/29/2017

TIME:

COURT ACTION: EO: COURT ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS
AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION TO DENY PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241
On December 30, 2016, Petitioner Jose Jacobo Escobar (“Petitioner”) filed a
“Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 2241” (“Petition”). [Dkt.
no. 1.] Respondents Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney General, Michael
Samaniego, District Director, DHS-ICE, and William Lothrop, Warden, Honolulu Federal
Detention Center (collectively “the Government”) filed a memorandum in opposition on
January 27, 2017, and Petitioner filed a reply on January 31, 2017. [Dkt. nos. 11, 12.]
On February 8, 2017, the magistrate judge filed his Findings and Recommendation to
Deny Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“2/8/17 F&R”).
[Dkt. no. 14.] On February 13, 2017, Petitioner filed his Objections to the 2/8/17 F&R
with this Court (“Petitioner’s Objections”). [Dkt. no. 15.] Finally, on March 17, 2017, at
the request of Petitioner, the Court held a status conference in the instant matter. After
careful consideration of the 2/8/17 F&R, Petitioner’s Objections, and the relevant legal
authority, the Court HEREBY DENIES Petitioner’s Objections and ADOPTS the 2/8/17
F&R. The Petition is therefore DENIED.
A written order will follow that will supersede this ruling. Any party planning to
file a motion for reconsideration must wait until the written order is filed to do so.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Submitted by: Warren N. Nakamura, Courtroom Manager