Contreras-Ramirez v. USA
Filing
27
ORDER ACCEPTING 24 Judge Bade's REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The Government's Motion to Dismiss Movant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel (Doc. 22 ) is granted. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the event Movant files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 11/14/16. (EJA)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Rodrigo Contreras-Ramirez,
Defendant/Movant,
10
11
ORDER
v.
12
No. CV-15-01692-PHX-GMS (BSB)
USA,
13
Plaintiff/Respondent.
14
15
16
Pending before the Court is the Government’s Motion to Dismiss Movant’s claims
17
of ineffective assistance of counsel and United States Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade’s
18
Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Docs. 2, 24. The R&R recommends that the
19
Court grant the Motion. Doc. 24 at 3. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they
20
had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections
21
could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 16 (citing
22
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th
23
Cir. 2003)).
24
The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to
25
review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
26
(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is
27
not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must
28
determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly
1
objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-
2
taken. The Court will accept the R&R and grant the Motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)
3
(stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
4
findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The
5
district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further
6
evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”).
7
IT IS ORDERED:
8
1.
Magistrate Judge Bade’s R&R (Doc. 24) is accepted.
9
2.
The Government’s Motion to Dismiss Movant’s claims of ineffective
10
11
assistance of counsel (Doc. 22) is granted.
4.
Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the
12
event Movant files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability
13
because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See
14
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
15
Dated this 14th day of November, 2016.
16
17
18
Honorable G. Murray Snow
United States District Judge
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?