Opinion
NO. 2:07-CR-90.
September 18, 2008
ORDER
This criminal matter is before the Court to consider the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated August 5, 2008. [Doc. 217]. The defendant has filed objections to this report. [Doc. 226].
As noted in Carter v. Commissioner of Social Security, 67 Fed.Appx. 906, 907, 2003 WL 21456263, 1 (6th Cir. (Mich.)):
The Sixth Circuit requires litigants to file specific and timely objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), in order to preserve the right to appeal a subsequent judgment of the district court adopting that report. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 n. 15, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Although the defendant's objection was timely, it was not specific. The defendant merely refers the Court to his original motion. Accordingly, the Court FINDS that the defendant has waived his objections to this Report and Recommendation.
Even if the defendant had filed proper objections, after careful and de novo consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, [Doc. 217], it is hereby ORDERED that this Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and APPROVED, and that the motion to suppress filed by the defendant is DENIED. [Doc. 133].