Ramirez Medina v. Asher

Filing 67

ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS AND DECLINING ORAL ARGUMENT: RE-NOTING petitioner's 66 OBJECTIONS to 64 Report and Recommendations; Noting Date 3/16/2017; respondents to file response to objections by 3/21/17; no reply shall be filed by petitioner; any objections re respondents' motion to dismiss remain due no later than 3/28/17 by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (RS)

Download PDF
Case 2:17-cv-00218-RSM Document 67 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 8 DANIEL RAMIREZ MEDINA, 9 Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS AND DECLINING ORAL ARGUMENT 10 v. 11 12 Case No. C17-0218RSM U.S. DEPARTMENT OD HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner’s Objections to U.S. Magistrate Judge 16 James Donohue’s Report and Recommendation (R&R) to this Court, which was issued on 17 March 14, 2017. Dkts. #64 and #66. Petitioner objects to the R&R to the extent that it 18 recommends this Court deny Petitioner’s Motion for Conditional Release. Id. Petitioner 19 20 further notes that the directive in the R&R that he note any Objections for the third Friday after 21 they are filed conflicts with Local Civil Rule 72(a), which states that Objections to R&Rs on 22 non-dispositive motions should be noted for the same day. Id. Finally, Petitioner requests that 23 this Court review his Objections on an expedited schedule and hold a hearing on his Objections 24 no later than Monday, March 20, 2017. Id. 25 26 27 Having reviewed Petitioner’s Objections and the remainder of this record, the Court hereby ORDERS: 28 ORDER PAGE - 1 Case 2:17-cv-00218-RSM Document 67 Filed 03/17/17 Page 2 of 2 1 1. The Court SHALL RE-NOTE Petitioner’s Objections for consideration on the same day they were filed (3/16/2017) pursuant to Local Civil Rule 72(a). 2 3 2. Respondents SHALL file a Response to those Objections no later than Tuesday, 4 March 21, 2017. Such Response shall be limited to eight (8) pages in length. No 5 Reply shall be filed by Petitioner. 6 7 3. It is not the Court’s typical practice to hold oral argument on Objections to R&Rs, 8 and the Court is not persuaded that it should do so in this matter. Accordingly, the 9 Court declines Petitioner’s request for any in-court hearing on his Objections, and 10 the Court will consider the Objections and any Response on the briefs in due course. 11 4. Any Objections to the R&R regarding Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss remain due 12 13 no later than March 28, 2017, and shall continue to be noted for consideration for 14 the third Friday after filing. 15 DATED this 17th day of March 2017. 16 A 17 18 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER PAGE - 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?