Darks v. Brunsman

Full title: RICO DARKS, Petitioner, v. TIMOTHY BRUNSMAN, Warden, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Jan 5, 2009

CASE NO. 2:08-cv-00043 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 5, 2009)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:08-cv-00043.

January 5, 2009

OPINION AND ORDER

GEORGE SMITH, District Judge

On December 11, 2008, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that respondent's motion to dismiss be denied and that respondent be directed to file a response to the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 within thirty days. Although the parties were advised of the right to object to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed.

The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. Respondent's motion to dismiss, Doc. No. 9, is DENIED. Respondent is DIRECTED to file a response to the petition which complies with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts within thirty (30) days.

IT IS SO ORDERED.