Barrett v. Eppinger, No. 1:2019cv01472 - Document 7 (N.D. Ohio 2021)
Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order: Following review of Judge Baughman's R & R, I adopt it in its entirety as the Order of the Court. Because Petitioner's § 2254 habeas petition is untimely and cannot be saved by either statutory or equitable tolling, Respondent's motion to dismiss is granted. (Doc. No. 5). re 6 . Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 7/26/2021. (S,AL)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Barrett v. Eppinger Doc. 7 Case: 1:19-cv-01472-JJH Doc #: 7 Filed: 07/26/21 1 of 1. PageID #: 145 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Jonathan Barrett, Case No. 1:19-cv-1472 Petitioner v. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Warden Keith J. Foley, Respondent Before me is the Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge William H. Baughman, Jr. filed on March 29, 2021. (Doc. No. 6). Under the relevant statute: Within [fourteen (14)] days after being served a copy of these proposed Findings and Recommendation, any party who wishes to object must file and serve written objections or further appeal is waived. United States v. Campbell, 261 F.3d 628, 631-32 (6th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (effective Dec. 1, 2009); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). In this case, the fourteen-day window for objections has elapsed, and no objections have been filed. Following review of Judge Baughman’s R & R, I adopt it in its entirety as the Order of the Court. Because Petitioner’s § 2254 habeas petition is untimely and cannot be saved by either statutory or equitable tolling, Respondent’s motion to dismiss is granted. (Doc. No. 5). So Ordered. s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
