Bowman v. Gilbert
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Benjamin H. Settle re 13 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by Eric David Bowman. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Eric Bowman, Prisoner ID: 364129)(TG)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
ERIC DAVID BOWMAN,
CASE NO. C16-5798BHS-DWC
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
14 of the Honorable David W. Christel, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 12), and
15 Petitioner Eric David Bowman’s objections to the R&R (Dkt. 13).
On January 13, 2017, Judge Christel issued the R&R recommending that the Court
17 dismiss Bowman’s petition with prejudice because it is time-barred. Dkt. 12. On
18 January 30, 2017, Bowman filed objections. Dkt. 13.
The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s
20 disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or
21 modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the
22 magistrate judge with instructions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
ORDER - 1
In this case, Bowman fails to advance any valid objection. Even if Bowman’s
2 petition states valid constitutional claims, the Court may not review the merits of the
3 petition because it was not timely filed. Moreover, the Court concludes that jurists of
4 reason would not debate whether the petition was timely filed. Therefore, the Court
5 having considered the R&R, Bowman’s objections, and the remaining record, does
6 hereby find and order as follows:
The R&R is ADOPTED;
Bowman’s petition is DISMISSED with prejudice because it is time-
A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED; and
The Clerk shall close this case and enter JUDGEMENT for Defendant.
Dated this 3rd day of March, 2017.
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge
ORDER - 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?