Medrano v. United States Parole Commission
||Jaime B Medrano
||United States Parole Commission
||August 20, 2014
||US District Court for the District of Arizona
||Tucson Division Office
||Leslie A Bowman (PS)
||Jennifer G Zipps
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 2241
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 12, 2015
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The 24 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted. Petitioner's 15 Motion to Amend the Caption is DENIED AS MOOT. Petitioner's 16 Motion to Summarily Decide the Issue of Exhaust ion is DENIED. Petitioner's 21 Motion for a Hearing is DENIED AS MOOT. Petitioner's 26 Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply is DENIED AS MOOT. Petitioner's 1 §2241 Petition is denied and this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in this matter. Signed by Judge Jennifer G Zipps on 3/11/2015. (ALS)
|February 13, 2015
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Court enter an order dismissing the 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus for failure to exhaust. Medrano's 15 motion to amend should be denied as moot. Medran o's 16 motion to summarily decide the issue of exhaustion in his favor should be denied. Medrano's 21 motion for a hearing to make factual findings related to the exhaustion issue should be denied as moot. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Report and Recommendation to the petitioner and the respondent. Signed by Magistrate Judge Leslie A Bowman on 2/13/2015. (See Order for details)(ALS)
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?