From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Raupp v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Nov 16, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-223 Erie (W.D. Pa. Nov. 16, 2006)

Summary

adopting the Report and Recommendation of then-Magistrate Judge Baxter

Summary of this case from Seldon v. Wetzel

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-223 Erie.

November 16, 2006


MEMORANDUM ORDER


This habeas corpus action was received by the Clerk of Court on September 27, 2006, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 8], filed on October 27, 2006, recommended that Petitioner's motion for injunctive relief [Doc. No. 4] be denied. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Petitioner by certified mail and on Respondents. No objections were filed. After de novo review of the motion and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 16th day of November, 2006;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner's motion for injunctive relief [Doc. No. 4] is DENIED.

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 8] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on October 27, 2006, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.


Summaries of

Raupp v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Nov 16, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-223 Erie (W.D. Pa. Nov. 16, 2006)

adopting the Report and Recommendation of then-Magistrate Judge Baxter

Summary of this case from Seldon v. Wetzel
Case details for

Raupp v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN RAUPP, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Nov 16, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-223 Erie (W.D. Pa. Nov. 16, 2006)

Citing Cases

Talbert v. Irvin

. This is not an arbitrary distinction or a technicality; rather, the Court completely “lacks jurisdiction…

Stewart v. Varano

In sum, a federal district court lacks jurisdiction over claims raised in a motion for injunctive relief…