Amarante De Jesus v. United States of America

Filing 12

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 10 MOTION to Dismiss 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) - McALLEN , Case terminated on 3/21/2017. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED.(Signed by Judge Micaela Alvarez) Parties notified.(bgarces, 7)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MCALLEN DIVISION
JOSE ABEL AMARANTE DE JESUS
Movant
VS.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent

§
§
§
§
§
§
§

ENTERED
March 22, 2017
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. 7:15-cv-100
CRIMINAL NO. 7:14-cr-0063

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pending before the Court is Movant=s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2255, which motion had been referred to the Magistrate Court for a
report and recommendation. On March 6, 2017, the Magistrate Court issued the Report and
Recommendation, recommending that Movant’s section 2255 Motion be dismissed without
prejudice as moot, and that a Certificate of Appealability be denied upon the issuance of this
Court’s final order. The time for filing objections has passed, and no objections have been filed.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the Report and
Recommendation for clear error.1 Finding no clear error, the Court adopts the Report and
Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Movant’s section
2255 is DISMISSED without prejudice as moot and that Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt.
Entry No. 10) is DENIED without prejudice as moot.

A Certificate of Appealability is

DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DONE at McAllen, Texas, this 21st day of March, 2017.
___________________________________
Micaela Alvarez
United States District Judge

1

As noted by the Fifth Circuit, A[t]he advisory committee=s note to Rule 72(b) states that, >[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the [district] court
need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.=@ Douglas v. United Services
Auto. Ass=n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P.72(b) advisory committee=s note (1983)) superceded by statute on other
grounds by 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1), as stated in ACS Recovery Servs., Inc v. Griffin, No. 11-40446, 2012 WL 1071216, at *7 n.5 (5th Cir. April 2,
2012).

1/1