Opinion
24-50082
05-13-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CHRISTOPHER S. MILLER, Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S APRIL 23, 2024 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [32]
Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds United States District Judge
This miscellaneous action was initiated by the government to request the issuance of writs of garnishment upon the judgment entered against Defendant Christopher S. Miller in criminal case no. 22-20138. After the Clerk of Court issued those writs, Defendant filed several requests for a hearing to contest the writs and claim exemptions to garnishment. (ECF Nos. 16-18, 25.) The Court referred Defendant's requests to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Stafford. (ECF Nos. 21, 28.) Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation to deny Defendant's claims for exemptions. (ECF No. 32.) No party filed objections. “[T]he failure to object to the magistrate judge's report[] releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter.” See Hall v. Rawal, No. 09-10933, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120541, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 24, 2012) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the matter and agrees with the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the Court ACCEPTS AND ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 32). Accordingly, Defendant's claims for exemptions to garnishment (ECF Nos. 16-18, 25) are DENIED.
SO ORDERED.