From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rachidi v. Sessions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
May 18, 2017
Case No. 17-cv-21575-GAYLES/WHITE (S.D. Fla. May. 18, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 17-cv-21575-GAYLES/WHITE

05-18-2017

KASULA MABANZA RACHIDI, Petitioner, v. JEFF SESSIONS, Attorney General of the United States, et al., Respondents.


ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White's Report Recommending Transfer of Venue [ECF No. 5], entered on March 21, 2017. Petitioner Kasula Mabanza Rachidi, who appears in this action pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241 on April 27, 2017, challenging his continued detention by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") [ECF No. 1]. The matter was referred to Judge White, pursuant to Administrative Order 2003-19 of this Court, for a ruling on all pretrial, nondispositive matters, and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 3].

Judge White's Report recommends that the Court transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, the federal district in which the petitioner is currently confined in ICE custody, for all further proceedings, including addressing the issue of the filing fee. To date, no objections have been filed.

A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections "pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with." United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). If no objections are filed, the district court need only review the report and recommendation for "clear error." Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note. The Court has undertaken this review and has found no clear error in the analysis and recommendations stated in the Report. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report Recommending Transfer of Venue [ECF No. 5] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference. This action is TRANSFERRED in its entirety to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.

This action is CLOSED in this District.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 18th day of May, 2017.

/s/_________

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Rachidi v. Sessions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
May 18, 2017
Case No. 17-cv-21575-GAYLES/WHITE (S.D. Fla. May. 18, 2017)
Case details for

Rachidi v. Sessions

Case Details

Full title:KASULA MABANZA RACHIDI, Petitioner, v. JEFF SESSIONS, Attorney General of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Date published: May 18, 2017

Citations

Case No. 17-cv-21575-GAYLES/WHITE (S.D. Fla. May. 18, 2017)