Husband v. Ryan et al

Filing 50

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Magistrate Judge Aspey's Report and Recommendation 41 is accepted; Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 is dismissed; the Clerk shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 4/16/15. (REW)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Sean Patrick Husband, Petitioner, 10 11 ORDER v. 12 No. CV-13-01320-PHX-DLR Charles L. Ryan, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 16 Pending before the Court are Petitioner Sean Patrick Husband’s Petition for Writ 17 of Habeas Corpus and United States Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey’s Report and 18 Recommendation (“R&R”). (Docs. 1, 41.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny 19 the Petition. (Doc. 41 at 38.) The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had 20 fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could 21 be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Id. at 38–39 (citing 22 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 23 2003)). 24 Respondents did not file an objection. Petitioner filed an objection on February 9, 25 2015, which the Court struck on March 18, 2015, for failure to comply with the Local 26 Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 49.) The Court granted Petitioner leave to file an 27 amended objection by April 2, 2015. (Id.) Petitioner did not file an amended objection, 28 which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1 at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . 2 require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. 3 Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate 4 judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless 5 reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will accept the R&R and 6 deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, 7 reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the 8 magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify 9 the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the 10 magistrate judge with instructions.”). 11 IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Aspey’s R&R (Doc. 41) is accepted. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas 13 Corpus (Doc. 1) is dismissed. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 15 Dated this 16th day of April, 2015. 16 17 18 19 20 Douglas L. Rayes United States District Judge 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?