Murphy v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Magistrate Judge Duncan's Report and Recommendation 12 is accepted; Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 5 is denied and dismissed with prejudice; the Clerk shall terminate this action; because this case arises under 28 U.S.C. 2241, no ruling on a Certificate of Appealability is required. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 5/28/13. (REW)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 No. CV-12-01390-PHX-GMS William Phillip Murphy, ORDER Petitioner, 10 11 v. 12 Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al., Respondents. 13 14 Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas 15 Corpus and United States Magistrate Judge David Duncan’s Report and 16 Recommendation (“R&R”). Docs. 5, 12. The R&R recommends that the Court deny and 17 dismiss the Petition with prejudice. Doc. 12 at 3. The Magistrate Judge advised the 18 parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file 19 timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. 20 Id. at 3 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. 21 Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). 22 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to 23 review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 24 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 25 not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 26 determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 27 objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well- 28 taken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny and dismiss the Petition with prejudice. 1 See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in 2 whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. 3 P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended 4 disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with 5 instructions.”). 6 IT IS ORDERED: 7 1. Magistrate Judge Duncan’s R&R (Doc. 12) is accepted. 8 2. Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 5) is 9 denied and dismissed with prejudice. 10 3. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 11 4. Because this case arises under 28 U.S.C. ' 2241, no ruling on a certificate 12 13 of appealability is required. Dated this 28th day of May, 2013. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?