From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Thomas

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Apr 19, 2011
CASE NO. 5:11CR62 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 19, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. 5:11CR62.

April 19, 2011


ORDER


Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in the above-entitled action. Under the relevant statute:

[. . .] Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In this case, the fourteen-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed nor has any extension of time been sought. The failure to file written objections to a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff'd, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation and accepts the same. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the report and recommendation, the defendant's motion to suppress is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Thomas

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Apr 19, 2011
CASE NO. 5:11CR62 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 19, 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, v. TIMOTHY BRIAN THOMAS, DEFENDANT

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Apr 19, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 5:11CR62 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 19, 2011)