Foster v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Filing
129
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION TO ALTER JUDGMENT - Petitioner's Motion to Alter Judgment 128 should be denied. Objections to R&R due by 4/15/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 4/1/2019. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
CHRISTOPHER FOSTER,
Petitioner,
:
- vs -
Case No. 1:15-cv-713
Consolidated with 1:16-cv-846
District Judge Michael R. Barrett
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
RONALD ERDOS, WARDEN,
Southern Ohio Correctional Facility,
:
Respondent.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION TO ALTER
JUDGMENT
These consolidated habeas corpus cases are before the Court on Petitioner’s New
Retroactive Evidence Motion to Alter [the Judgment] under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e)(ECF No. 128). In
it Petitioner argues this Court’s Judgment of July 24, 2017 (ECF No. 81), is erroneous as a matter
of law.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) has a twenty-eight-days from judgment deadline which cannot be
extended by this Court. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b)(2). On that basis, the instant Motion should be
denied.
April 1, 2019.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge
1
NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the
proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this Report
and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is extended to seventeen days
because this Report is being served by mail. .Such objections shall specify the portions of the
Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections.
If the Report and Recommendations are based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record
at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or
such portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless
the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party=s objections
within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in
accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d
947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 (1985).
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?