RATUSHNY v. BICKELL et al
ORDER THAT THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO REMOVE THE CASE FROM CIVIL SUSPENSE; THE OBJECTIONS ARE SUSTAINED IN PART AND OVERRULED IN PART; THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED IN PART; THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED W ITH PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING; THE COURT ISSUES A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; AND THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THE CASE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE CYNTHIA M. RUFE ON 4/17/17. 4/20/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND E-MAILED.(ti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RICHARD ALLEN RATUSHNY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-1324
TABB BICKELL, et al.
AND NOW, this 17th day of April 2017, upon careful independent consideration of the
pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and all related filings, and upon review of the Report
and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter, and the
objections thereto, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is
hereby ORDERED that:
The Clerk is directed to REMOVE the case from Civil Suspense;
The Objections are SUSTAINED IN PART AND OVERRULED IN PART;
The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED IN PART;
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE
and without an evidentiary hearing;
The Court ISSUES a certificate of appealability; and
The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case.
It is so ORDERED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/Cynthia M. Rufe
CYNTHIA M. RUFE, J.
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?