The State Of Texas v. Diruzzo

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. ORDERED that Defendants counterclaims are DENIED and the case is DISMISSED.The Court further finds Defendants Notice of Unlawful Incarceration filed after the report of the Magistrate Judge is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 12/7/2016. (pad, )

United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DIVISION
SHERMAN DIVISION

THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOSEPH ANDREW DIRUZZO,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:16CV822
JUDGE MAZZANT/JUDGE JOHNSON

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this
matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636. On November 10, 2016, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing
proposed findings of fact and recommendations that pro se Defendant Joseph Andrew Diruzzo’s
counterclaims should be DENIED and this case should be DISMISSED because it was
improperly removed to the Eastern District of Texas (see Dkt. #3).
The record in this case indicates Defendant received a copy of the Magistrate Judge’s
report and recommendation on November 21, 2016 (see Dkt. #5). Defendant timely filed
Objections on November 28, 2016 (Dkt. #6). Defendant makes similar arguments as made in his
Notice of Removal (Dkt. #1), and again fails to demonstrate that the criminal case against him in
24th Judicial District in Victoria County was properly removed to the Sherman Division of the
Eastern District of Texas.

1

The Court having made a de novo review of the objections raised by Defendant is of the
opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the objections
of Defendant are without merit as to the ultimate recommendation.
Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge
as the findings and conclusions of this Court. It is, therefore, ORDERED that Defendant’s
.

counterclaims are DENIED and the case is DISMISSED.
The Court further finds Defendant’s Notice of Unlawful Incarceration (Dkt. #4) filed
after the report of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #3) is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 7th day of December, 2016.

___________________________________
AMOS L. MAZZANT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2