Rodriguez v. Wagner
Filing
8
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 6 Report and Recommendations. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. A Final Judgment dismissing the Petition with prejudice will follow in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 10/27/2016 (ND)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
WESTERN DIVISION
OSCAR RODRIGUEZ
PETITIONER
VS.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-cv-82(DCB)(MTP)
BARBARA WAGNER
RESPONDENT
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael T.
Parker’s Report and Recommendation (docket entry 6), to which no
objections were filed by the Petitioner. Having carefully reviewed
same, the Court finds that the Petitioner is not entitled to pursue
his claims in a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Furthermore, if he were to pursue a civil rights claim instead, he
has not asserted a violation of a constitutionally protected right
entitling him to relief under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of
the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
the
Petitioner
has
failed
to
show
any
grounds
Furthermore,
for
an
Equal
Protection claim, as set forth in the Report and Recommendation.
Therefore, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation, and
shall
dismiss
the
Petition
for
Writ
of
Habeas
Corpus
with
prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker’s
Report and Recommendation (docket entry 6) is ADOPTED as the
findings and conclusions of this Court;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition be dismissed with
prejudice.
A Final Judgment dismissing the Petition with prejudice will
follow in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
SO ORDERED, this the 27th day of October, 2016.
/s/ David Bramlette
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?