Opinion
22-20124-CR-ALTONAGA/Damian
01-09-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JASON WAGNER, Defendant.
ORDER
CECILIA M. ALTONAGA CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendant's Objections to the Report and Recommendation (DE 91) on Motion to Dismiss Count 5 and Moton to Sever Count 5 of the Superseding Indictment [ECF No. 96], filed on December 23, 2022. Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 91]; the Transcript [ECF No. 112] of the hearing before the Magistrate Judge; and the entire record; and having made a de novo determinationwith respect to those portions of the Report to which Defendant has formally objected, it is
“The Court need not do over every step done by a magistrate judge on which there was some objection. De novo review means review without any deference; it does not mean that a district judge must redo the case without consideration of what the magistrate judge has written.” DeJonge v. Burton, No. 1:16-cv-980, 2018 WL 4929756, at *1 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 11, 2018) (quotation marks and citation omitted).
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation on Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and Sever Count Five of the Superseding Indictment [ECF No. 91] is ADOPTED in its entirety, and the Objections [ECF No. 96] are OVERRULED. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 57] and Amended Motion to Sever [ECF No. 65] are DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED.