govinfo:USCOURTS-gand-1_17-cr-00039-5

1 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 
ATLANTA DIVISION 
 
 
 
United States of America, 
 
v. 
 
Nathan Laron Grissom, 
 
Defendant. 
 
_________________________________/ 
 
 
 
Case No. 1:17-cr-39-MLB 
 
 
 
  
ORDER 
In March 2021, Natham Grissom pleaded guilty to interstate 
communication of a threat in violat ion of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), and the 
Court sentenced him to time served plus  90 days of supervised release.  
(Dkt. 125.)  On May 5, 2025, Gri ssom filed a document that the 
Magistrate Judge interpreted as a motion to vacate his conviction under 
28 U.S.C. § 2255.  (Dkt. 128.)  On May 7, 2025, he filed a motion to dismiss 
the indictment.  (Dkt. 129.)  The Magi strate Judge ordered the Clerk to 
send Grissom the proper form to perfect his § 2255 motion, ordered 
Grissom to file that motion within 30 days, and warned that his failure 
to do so would result in dismissal of his motion.  (Dkt. 130.)  Grissom did 
Case 1:17-cr-00039-MLB-JEM     Document 133     Filed 05/01/26     Page 1 of 4
 
2 
 
not do that.  The Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation 
saying this Court should (1) dismi ss his § 2255 motion to vacate for 
failure to comply with a lawful or der of the Court and (2) dismiss his 
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Grissom 
filed it more than four years after his criminal case concluded.  (Dkt. 131 
at 2 (citing United States v. Felder, 220 F. App’x 951, 952 (11th Cir. 2007) 
(per curiam) (court lacks subject ma tter jurisdiction over motion to 
dismiss case that is no longer pending).)  Grissom filed no objections.   
Federal law requires district courts to “make a de novo 
determination of those portions of [an R&R] to which objection is made.”  
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).  Any such object ion “must specifically identify the 
portions of the [R&R] to which object ion is made and the specific basis 
for objection.”  McCullars v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 825 F. App’x 685, 
694 (11th Cir. 2020) 1; see United States v. Schultz , 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 
(11th Cir. 2009) (“[A] party that wish es to preserve its objection must 
 
1 The Court recognizes McCullars is unpublished and not binding.  The 
Court cites it and other unpublished ca ses as instructive, nonetheless.  
See Searcy v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. , 902 F.3d 1342, 1355 n.5 (11th 
Cir. 2018) (“Unpublished cases do no t constitute binding authority and 
may be relied on only to the extent they are persuasive.”). 
Case 1:17-cr-00039-MLB-JEM     Document 133     Filed 05/01/26     Page 2 of 4
 
3 
 
clearly advise the district court and pinpoint the specific findings that the 
party disagrees with.”).  “Frivolous, conclusive, or general objections need 
not be considered by the district court.”  Marsden v. Moore, 847 F.2d 1536, 
1548 (11th Cir. 1988).  When no objectio ns are filed, de novo review is 
unnecessary.  Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not 
appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a 
magistrate’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other 
standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”).   
Even assuming review is necessary here, the Court sees no error in 
the Magistrate Judge’s recommendatio ns.  Grissom failed to perfect his 
motion to vacate as ordered by the Court and his criminal case has not 
been pending for years.  The Court thus ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s 
report and recommendation (Dkt. 131) and DISMISSES both Grissom’s 
motion to vacate (Dkt. 128) and his motion to dismiss (Dkt. 129).  Since 
no reasonable jurist could find dismissal of his motion to vacate wrong or 
debatable, the Court also adopts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation 
that it DENY a certificate of appealability.  
 
        
Case 1:17-cr-00039-MLB-JEM     Document 133     Filed 05/01/26     Page 3 of 4
 
4 
 
SO ORDERED this 1st day of May, 2026. 
 
   
 
1 (1 1 (1 
MICH" KEL  L.  BROWN 
Case 1:17-cr-00039-MLB-JEM     Document 133     Filed 05/01/26     Page 4 of 4

Passage view · GavelSight