Washington v. USA
Filing
18
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE for 14 Report and Recommendations. ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Motion pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) to Return Property" (Dkt. # 1) and "Reply" (Dkt. #12) are DENIED, and Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Richard A. Schell on 3/31/2017. (daj, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
RAYMOND WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
USA,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:16-CV-00255
JUDGE SCHELL/JUDGE JOHNSON
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action,
this matter having been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.
On November 4, 2016, the report of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #14) was entered containing
proposed findings of fact and recommendations that pro se Plaintiff Raymond Washington’s
“Motion pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) to Return Property” (Dkt. #1) and “Reply” (Dkt. #12)
be denied. The court entered Plaintiff’s acknowledgment of receipt of the report of the Magistrate
Judge on January 30, 2017 (Dkt. #16).
Having received the report of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto
having been timely filed, this court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the
Magistrate Judge are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report as the findings and
conclusions of the court.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Motion pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) to
Return Property” (Dkt. # 1) and “Reply” (Dkt. #12) are DENIED, and Plaintiffs’
claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
.
SIGNED this the 31st day of March, 2017.
_______________________________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
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?