Corrales #089694 v. Ryan et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. It is ordered Magistrate Judge Boyles' R&R 18 is accepted. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 is denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this acti on and enter judgment accordingly. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 8/14/2015. (ACL)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Louis Ernesto Corrales,
Charles Ryan, et al.,
Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and
United States Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyles’ Report and Recommendation (“R&R”).
Docs. 1, 18. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Petition and dismiss with
prejudice. Doc. 18 at 12. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen
days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be
considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 12 (citing Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b) and 72; U.S.C. ¶ 636(b)(1); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d
1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)).
The parties did not file objections1, which relieves the Court of its obligation to
review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is
Petitioner was given an extension to file an objection until August 7, 2015. On
August 10, Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration asking for additional time and the
Court denied the motion.
not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must
determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly
objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-
taken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny the Petition and dismiss with prejudice.
See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended
disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with
IT IS ORDERED:
Magistrate Judge Boyles’ R&R (Doc. 18) is accepted.
Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and
dismissed with prejudice.
The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment
Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the
event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability
because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
Dated this 14th day of August, 2015.
Honorable G. Murray Snow
United States District Judge
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?