Brown v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution
Filing
19
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 13 Report and Recommendations.; adopting Report and Recommendations re 17 Report and Recommendations and denying the applications for default judgment Docs 12 and 16 . Signed by Judge James L Graham on 1/14/2015. (ds)(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
EASTERN DIVISION
IRVIN M. BROWN,
Petitioner,
Civil Action 2:14-cv-813
Judge Graham
Magistrate Judge King
vs.
WARDEN, NOBLE CORRECTIONAL
INSTITUTION,
Respondent.
ORDER
This is a habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Respondent was granted an extension of time, to December 12, 2014, to
respond to the Petition.
Order, ECF 11. Respondent filed a return of
writ in timely fashion on December 12, 2014. Return of Writ, ECF 15.
On December 3, 2014, the United States Magistrate Judge recommended
that petitioner’s first application for the entry of respondent’s
default, Application to Clerk for Entry of Default, ECF 12, be denied.
Report and Recommendation, ECF 13. On December 23, 2014, the United
States Magistrate Judge recommended that petitioner’s second
application for the entry of respondent’s default, Application to
Clerk for Entry of Default, ECF 16, be denied.
Report and
Recommendation, ECF 17. Although the parties were advised of their
right to object to these recommendations, there has been no such
objection.
The Report and Recommendation, ECF 13, and the Report and
Recommendation, ECF 17, are ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED.
Petitioner’s
applications for the entry of respondent’s default, ECF 12, ECF 16,
are DENIED.
Date: January 14, 2015
_____s/James L. Graham_______
James L. Graham
United States District Judge
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?