Clinton v. Wray
Clinton v. Wray
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION SEAN PUCHALOW CLINTON, ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) No. 3:22-CV-2301-B-BH ) CHRISTOPHER WRAY, Director of ) F.B.I., et al., ) Respondents. ) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court is of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. For the reasons stated in the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, any habeas claims in the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under
28 U.S.C. § 2241, received on October 14, 2022 (doc. 3), will be DISMISSED by separate judgment for lack of jurisdiction, and any civil claims will be DISMISSED without prejudice to seeking relief in Case No. 4:22-CV-889-Y. A certificate of appealability (COA) is not required for to appeal the denial of relief under
28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Padilla v. United States,
416 F. 424, 425 (5th Cir. 2005). If the petitioner files a notice of appeal, he must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. SIGNED this 8'" day of November, 2022.
JANE J. BOY UTED ST S DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown