Mosakowski v. Ryan et al

Filing 17

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Magistrate Judge Fine's Report and Recommendation 16 is accepted; the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 is denied and this action is dismissed with prejudice; 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. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 2/3/17. (REW)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Paul Mark Mosakowski, 10 Petitioner, 11 ORDER v. 12 No. CV-15-02010-PHX-GMS Charles L Ryan, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 16 United States Magistrate Judge Deborah M. Fine’s Report and Recommendation 17 (“R&R”). Docs. 1, 16. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Petition and 18 dismiss with prejudice. Doc. 16 at 13. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they 19 had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections 20 could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 13 (citing 21 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 22 Cir. 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 Fine’s R&R (Doc. 16) is accepted. 9 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and this action is 10 11 dismissed with prejudice. 3. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the 12 event Petitioner 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 3rd day of February, 2017. 16 17 18 19 Honorable G. Murray Snow United States District Judge 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?