Moczo v. Heath

Moczo v. Heath

Petitioner:	Jason Moczo
Respondent:	Philip D. Heath
Case Number:	1:2012cv08509
Filed:	November 19, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Westchester
Presiding Judge:	Unassigned
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
June 6, 2016	Filing 27 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 26 Report and Recommendations re: 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. After careful consideration, Magistrate Judge Ellis issued a Report and Recommendation (the "R & R"), recommending t hat the petition be (1) dismissed, on the basis that Moczo has failed to exhaust the claims in his petition, or (2) denied, on the basis that, even if he had exhausted those claims, they lack merit. ECF No. 26. Despite notification of the right to ob ject to the R & R, no objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). When no objection is made, the Court reviews the R & R for clear error. E.g., Gilford v. Racette, No. 13 Civ. 5881, 2015 WL 7430825, at *1 (S .D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2015). The Court finds no clear error. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R & R in its entirety. The petition is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case and to mail a copy of this order to Petitioner pro se. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 6/6/2016) (kko)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 6, 2016

Filing 27 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 26 Report and Recommendations re: 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. After careful consideration, Magistrate Judge Ellis issued a Report and Recommendation (the "R & R"), recommending t hat the petition be (1) dismissed, on the basis that Moczo has failed to exhaust the claims in his petition, or (2) denied, on the basis that, even if he had exhausted those claims, they lack merit. ECF No. 26. Despite notification of the right to ob ject to the R & R, no objections were filed, and the time to do so has passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). When no objection is made, the Court reviews the R & R for clear error. E.g., Gilford v. Racette, No. 13 Civ. 5881, 2015 WL 7430825, at *1 (S .D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2015). The Court finds no clear error. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R & R in its entirety. The petition is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case and to mail a copy of this order to Petitioner pro se. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 6/6/2016) (kko)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Moczo v. Heath
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Jason Moczo
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Philip D. Heath
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?