(HC) Powe v. Biter, No. 2:2015cv02639 - Document 31 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 1/23/18 ADOPTING 30 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 25 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. (Kaminski, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDRE POWE, 12 13 14 No. 2:15-cv-02639-GEB-GGH Petitioner, v. ORDER MARTIN D. BITER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner brings this habeas corpus petition in pro se and in forma pauperis. The matter 18 was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 19 302(c)(17). 20 On January 4, 2018 the Magistrate issued Findings and Recommendations recommending 21 that petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 25, to revisit earlier Findings and 22 Recommendations pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(b) should be denied and 23 granted petitioner 14 days from the date of the Order to file any objections. ECF No. 21. In that 24 document the Magistrate informed petitioner that a failure to object could result in a waiver of his 25 right to appeal the District Court’s Order. No objections have been received. 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 27 the District Judge has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the 28 Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations the court ADOPTS the findings and 1 1 2 3 4 5 recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED; IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 23, 2018 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
