Nash v. F C I - Talladega

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION

PAUL NASH, JR., ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 1:24-cv-00391-ACA-SGC ) WARDEN, FCI - TALLADEGA, ) ) Respondent. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The magistrate judge entered a report on June 18, 2025, recommending that this court dismiss Petitioner Paul Nash, Jr.’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ of habeas corpus without prejudice as unexhausted. (Doc. 13 at 6).1 Although the report advised Mr. Nash of his right to file written objections and of the consequences of failing to object, the court has not received any objections within the deadline. Mr. Nash’s failure to file specific objections waives any challenge to the proposed findings and recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. R. 3- 1. In light of the proposed findings, the court agrees with the proposed recommendation. The court therefore ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and

1 The report’s introductory paragraph states that Mr. Nash’s “petition is due to be denied as unexhausted and meritless.” (Doc. 13 at 1) (emphasis added). However, the report addressed only Mr. Nash’s failure to exhaust and the recommendation was to dismiss the petition only for lack of exhaustion. (Id. at 4–6). Accordingly, the court finds that the introductory statement was a typographical error. This opinion and the accompanying order to do not rule on the merits of Mr. Nash’s claims. ACCEPTS her recommendation. The court WILL DISMISS Mr. Nash’s § 2241 petition WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Because the petition concerns calculation of a federal sentence, a ruling on a certificate of appealability is not required. Cf 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B); see also Sawyer v. Holder, 326 F.3d 1363, 1364 n.3 (11th Cir. 2003). The court will enter a separate final order consistent with this opinion. DONE and ORDERED this July 16, 2025. lu UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE