Opinion
1:09CV314.
February 1, 2011
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge recommending that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. The Recommendation was filed on October 26, 2010, and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). On December 9, 2010, Plaintiff filed timely Objections to the Recommendation. The Court has now reviewed de novo the Objections and the portions of the Recommendation to which objection was made, and finds that the Objections do not change the substance of the United States Magistrate Judge's ruling. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation [Doc. #26] is therefore affirmed and adopted. In addition, the Court notes that following the issuance of the Recommendation, Plaintiff filed a Successive Motion for Return of Property ("Successive Motion") [Doc. #28] relating to the same property at issue in Plaintiff's original Motion for Return of Property [Doc. #2], and forwarding the same concerns addressed in the Recommendation. The Court further notes that Plaintiff's reasons for filing the Successive Motion appear to have stemmed not from an attempt to raise new issues for the Court's consideration or to cause delay in these proceedings, but rather from confusion regarding the necessity to re-file documents following the re-opening of this case. As such, finding no new issues for the Court's consideration, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's Successive Motion [Doc. #28] is denied as being without merit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #9] is GRANTED, that Plaintiff's Motion for Return of Property [Doc. #2] is DENIED, and that this case will be dismissed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Successive Motion for Return of Property [Doc. #28] is DENIED as being without merit. A Judgment will be entered contemporaneously herewith.
This, the 1st day of February, 2011.