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)
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?