Odom v. United States

Docket 5:25-cv-00626

Filed
2025-06-09
Terminated
Not recorded
Case type
cv

Outcome

other dismissal

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=87 OFFICE=5 DOCKET=2500626 FILEDATE=06/09/2025 DISP=14, PROCPROG=1, JUDGMENT=0; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA NYKEEM ODOM, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-25-626-J ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Respondent. ) ORDER Petitioner, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Amanda L. Maxfield for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636. [Doc. No. 3]. On July 9, 2025, Judge Maxfield issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that based upon Petitioner’s failure to comply with the Court’s order to cure the deficiencies in his filings, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be dismissed without prejudice to the re-filing. [Doc. No. 5]. Petitioner was advised of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation by July 30, 2025. No objection has been filed. Petitioner has therefore waived any right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues in the Report and Recommendation. See Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 5] and DISMISSES Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, without prejudice, based upon Petitioner’s failure to comply with the Court’s orders. A certificate of appealability is DENIED, as the Court concludes Petitioner has not made “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED this 18" day of August, 2025. BERNARD M. JONES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.