Pina v. United States U.S. Marshals

Filing 9

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ, OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8 AND DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS 6 . Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 1-13-2016. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON Demian Joseph Pina, Petitioner, Case No. 3:15-cv-080 Judge Thomas M. Rose v. United States Marshal for the Southern District of Ohio, Respondent. DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ (DOC. 7), OVERRULING PETITIONER=S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE=S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, (DOC. 8), AND DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS, (DOC. 6). Pending before the Court are Petitioner Demian Joseph Pina=s Objections to the Magistrate=s Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 8). The Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz, (Doc. 7), recommends that the Court deny Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. (Doc. 6). As required by 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Plaintiff=s objections, (Docs. 8), to the Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendations, (Doc. 7), are not well taken and they are hereby OVERRULED. Wherefore, the Court DENIES the Motion (Doc. 6). The case remains closed. DONE and ORDERED this Wednesday, January 13, 2016. s/Thomas M. Rose ________________________________ THOMAS M. ROSE 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?