From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ruiz-Garcia v. Dretke

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Laredo Division
Feb 9, 2008
CIVIL ACTION. NO. L-06-017 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 9, 2008)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION. NO. L-06-017.

February 9, 2008


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


Pending is Respondent Dretke's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment. (Dkt. No. 17.) Magistrate Judge Diana Saldaña filed a Report and Recommendation on January 11, 2008, to which no objections were filed. Judge Saldaña recommends that the motion be granted.

Having reviewed the report for clear error, this Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation should be and is, hereby, ACCEPTED, in its entirety.

"The advisory committee's note to Rule 72(b) states that, `[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the [district] court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'" Douglass v. United Svs. Auto. As'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996) (quoting FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note (1983)).

It is, therefore, ORDERED that the Amended Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED. The original Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 16) is DENIED as moot. Ruiz-Garcia's § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus shall be dismissed. The dismissal will be with prejudice except for the confiscation-of-funds claim, which will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.


Summaries of

Ruiz-Garcia v. Dretke

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Laredo Division
Feb 9, 2008
CIVIL ACTION. NO. L-06-017 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 9, 2008)
Case details for

Ruiz-Garcia v. Dretke

Case Details

Full title:BERNIE RUIZ-GARCIA, Petitioner, v. DOUG DRETKE, et al., Respondents

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Laredo Division

Date published: Feb 9, 2008

Citations

CIVIL ACTION. NO. L-06-017 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 9, 2008)