OUTERBRIDGE v. OBERLANDER
This text of OUTERBRIDGE v. OBERLANDER (OUTERBRIDGE v. OBERLANDER) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ELLIOT OUTERBRIDGE : CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 20-2783 DEREK OBERLANDER, e¢ al.
ORDER AND NOW, this 30% day of July 2021, upon careful and independent consideration of the Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF Doc. No. 1), the Response to the Petition (ECF Doc. No. 14), United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret’s May 26, 2021 Report and Recommendation (ECF Doc. No. 19), Petitioner’s Objections (ECF Doc. No. 23), and for reasons in the accompanying Memorandum, it is ORDERED: 1. We APPROVE and ADOPT Judge Lloret’s May 26, 2021 Report and Recommendation (ECF Doc. No. 19) as we overrule Petitioner’s Objections (ECF Doc. No. 23); 2. We DENY and DISMISS the Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF Doc. No. 1) with prejudice; 3. We DENY a certificate of appealability;' and, 4. The Clerk of Court shall close this case.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
OUTERBRIDGE v. OBERLANDER, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/outerbridge-v-oberlander-paed-2021.