Jones v. Rider et al

Filing 17

ORDER, accepting Magistrate Judge Duncan's 16 Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. Pursuant to Ru le 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 07/21/2015. (ATD)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Signe Jones,

No. CV-14-01775-PHX-GMS
Petitioner,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Pamala Rider, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15

Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and

16

United States Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan’s Report and Recommendation

17

(“R&R”). Docs. 1, 16. The R&R recommends that the Petition be denied and dismissed

18

with prejudice. Doc. 16 at 7. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had

19

fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could

20

be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 7 (citing Fed. R.

21

Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.

22

2003)).

23

The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to

24

review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149

25

(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is

26

not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must

27

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly

28

objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-

1

taken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny the Petition and dismiss with prejudice.

2

See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in

3

whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ.

4

P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended

5

disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with

6

instructions.”).

7

IT IS ORDERED:

8

1.

Magistrate Judge Duncan’s R&R (Doc. 16) is accepted.

9

2.

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and

10

dismissed with prejudice.

11

3.

The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.

12

4.

Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the

13

event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability

14

because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See

15

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

16

Dated this 21st day of July, 2015.

17
18
19

Honorable G. Murray Snow
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-