ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS (DOC. #13) AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS(DOC#12) DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (DOC. #10)
THOMAS M. ROSE, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court pursuant to the Petitioner's Objections (Doc. #13), filed January 17, 2017, to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations (Doc. #12) filed January 4, 2017. The Court has conducted a de novo review of all filings in this matter and finds the Objections (Doc. #13) not to be well-founded and OVERRULES same, ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations (Doc. #12) DENYING Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment (Doc. #10) .
In so ruling, this Court finds, as did the Magistrate Judge, that the Grounds for Relief asserted in the Petitioner's Motion (Doc.#10) were not well founded. Petitioner was not diligent in proceeding pro se. Petitioner at the time of the Report and Recommendations was represented by counsel who made the decision not to object. Petitioner waited more than two months from the Court's notice that he needed to discharge counsel in order to proceed pro se before taking such action.
Therefore, this Court DENIES the Petitioner's Motion (Doc. #10) for Relief from Judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.