Hubbs v. Norman et al

Filing 24

ORDER granting 20 Motion to Transfer Case; adopting Report and Recommendations re 23 Report and Recommendation.. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 12/8/2017. (mb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA THOMAS GARY HUBBS, JR., Plaintiff, Case No. CIV-17-606-D vs. JEREMY WADE, et al. Defendants. ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE This matter comes before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Shon T. Erwin pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C). Judge Erwin finds that Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief should be dismissed, that venue is improper in this judicial district, and that the case should be transferred to the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Oklahoma. The record reflects no timely objection to the Report nor request for additional time to object, although Plaintiff was expressly advised of the right to object and the waiver rule. The Court finds that Plaintiff has waived further review of the issues addressed in the Report. See Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991); see also United States v. 2121 E. 30th St., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996). For this reason, and the reasons explained by Judge Erwin, the Court finds that a transfer of the case is warranted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).1 1 Judge Erwin recommends a discretionary transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) but a transfer is necessary in this case to cure a defect in venue. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 23] is ADOPTED and that Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue [Doc No. 20] is GRANTED, as set forth herein. This action is transferred to the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Oklahoma. IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of December, 2017. 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?