Sanchez v. Schroeder et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The 12 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is accepted; the Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 with prejudice; the Clerk shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 12/16/11. (REW)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Rene Orivel Sanchez,

10

Petitioner,

11

v.

12
Therese Schroeder, et al.,
13
Respondents.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 11-01237-PHX-NVW (MEA)
ORDER

15

Pending before the court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of Magistrate

16

Judge Aspey (Doc. 12) regarding Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed

17

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). The R&R recommends that the Petition be denied

18

and dismissed with prejudice. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had

19

fourteen days to file objections to the R&R. (Doc. 12 at 15 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)).

20

Plaintiff requested an additional ninety days to file an objection to the R&R (Doc. 13), which

21

the Court granted (Doc. 14). However, no objections were filed.

22

Because the parties did not file objections, the court need not review any of the

23

Magistrate Judge’s determinations on dispositive matters. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1);

24

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003);

25

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any

26

review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”). The absence of a

27

timely objection also means that error may not be assigned on appeal to any defect in the

28

rulings of the Magistrate Judge on any non-dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) (“A

1

party may serve and file objections to the order within 14 days after being served with a copy

2

[of the magistrate’s order]. A party may not assign as error a defect in the order not timely

3

objected to.”); Simpson v. Lear Astronics Corp., 77 F.3d 1170, 1174 (9th Cir. 1996); Philipps

4

v. GMC, 289 F.3d 1117, 1120-21 (9th Cir. 2002).

5

Notwithstanding the absence of an objection, the court has reviewed the R&R and

6

finds that it is well taken. The court will accept the R&R and dismiss the Petition. See 28

7

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or

8

in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”).

9
10

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge (Doc. 12) is accepted.

11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment dismissing

12

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1)

13

with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action.

14

DATED this 16th day of December, 2011.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-