From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gurzi v. Marques

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Dec 2, 2019
Case No. 18-CV-3104 (NEB/KMM) (D. Minn. Dec. 2, 2019)

Opinion

Case No. 18-CV-3104 (NEB/KMM)

12-02-2019

PHILIP EUGENE GURZI, Petitioner, v. WARDEN R. MARQUES, Respondent.


ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court has received the October 10, 2019 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Katherine M. Menendez. [ECF No. 14.] No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and the Court therefore reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 14] is ACCEPTED;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DENIED; and

3. The action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: December 2, 2019

BY THE COURT:

s/Nancy E. Brasel

Nancy E. Brasel

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Gurzi v. Marques

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Dec 2, 2019
Case No. 18-CV-3104 (NEB/KMM) (D. Minn. Dec. 2, 2019)
Case details for

Gurzi v. Marques

Case Details

Full title:PHILIP EUGENE GURZI, Petitioner, v. WARDEN R. MARQUES, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Date published: Dec 2, 2019

Citations

Case No. 18-CV-3104 (NEB/KMM) (D. Minn. Dec. 2, 2019)

Citing Cases

Wanner v. FPC-Duluth

It is doubtful that the additional administrative process required to satisfy the exhaustion requirement…