This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on January 16, 2009 by the Honorable David R. Homer, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and L.R. 72.3(c) of the Northern District of New York. Report-Rec. (Dkt. No. 5). After ten days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent the entire file to the undersigned, including the objections by the Petitioners, which were filed on February 2, 2009. Objections (Dkt. No. 6).
It is the duty of this Court to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). "A [district] judge . . . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Id. This Court has considered the objections and has undertaken a de novo review of the record and has determined that the Report-Recommendation should be approved for the reasons stated therein. Since the petition is being dismissed, the Motion to consolidate (Dkt. No. 3) is denied as moot.
By letter Motion filed on February 12, 2009, Petitioner Jonathan Williams requests to be removed as a party to this action. Dkt. No. 8. Williams does not provide any basis for this request. As Williams brings this request only after the filing of the Magistrate's Report-Recommendation which recommends dismissal of the petition, and the Court is adopting that Report-Recommendation, the Motion is denied as moot.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED; and it is further
ORDERED, that Petitioners' Motion to consolidate cases (Dkt. No. 3) is DENIED as moot; and it is further
ORDERED, that Jonathan Williams' letter Motion requesting to be removed as a party to this action (Dkt. No. 8) is DENIED as moot; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on all parties.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw ...