Watts v. Gunther

Filing 13

ORDER that the Report and Recommendation 11 is accepted. The Petition is dismissed, without prejudice, and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 3/10/2025. (REK)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
Michael Watts,

9

Petitioner,

10
11

v.

12

J. Gunther,

13

No. CV-24-03135-PHX-JAT
ORDER

Respondent.

14
15

Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed

16

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Magistrate Judge to whom this case was referred issued

17

a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending the Petition be dismissed. (Doc.

18

11). The time for filing objections has run, and neither party filed objections.1

19

This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

20

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). It is “clear that

21

the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de

22

novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d

23

1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263

24

F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (“Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that

25

de novo review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, ‘but not

26

otherwise.’”); Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Ctr. v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 589 F.3d

27

1027, 1032 (9th Cir. 2009) (the district court “must review de novo the portions of the

28
1

Petitioner’s copy of the R&R was returned by the post office as undeliverable. (Doc. 12).

1

[Magistrate Judge’s] recommendations to which the parties object.”). District courts are

2

not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an

3

objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (emphasis added); see also 28 U.S.C.

4

§ 636(b)(1) (“the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report

5

and recommendation] to which objection is made.”).

6

No objections having been filed,

7

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11) is accepted; the

8

Petition is dismissed, without prejudice, and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment

9

accordingly.2

10

Dated this 10th day of March, 2025.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

Because the Petition was filed pursuant to § 2241, no certificate of appealability is
necessary. See Forde v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 114 F.3d 878, 879 (9th Cir. 1997).
-2-