Sondey v. Wolfenbarger

Filing 41

ORDER Adopting 39 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Victoria A Roberts. (DWor)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TODD MATTHEW SONDEY, Petitioner, v. JEFF WHITE, Respondent. / ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION On November 18, 2009, Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives submitted a Report and Recommendation (Doc. #39) recommending the Court DENY Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. #1). The recommendation says: The parties to this action may object to and seek review of this Report and Recommendation, but are required to act within ten (10) days of service of a copy hereof as provided for in 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich. LR 72.1(d)(2). Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). Filing of objections which raise some issues but fail to raise others with specificity, will not preserve all the objections a party might have to this Report and Recommendation. See Willis v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 931 F.2d 390, 401 (6th Cir. 1991). Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). (Emphasis added). Petitioner filed objections on November 30, 2009: "due to the petitioner having no specialized training and knowledge in the science of law, through the aid of a `Jail house Lawyer' and because petitioner has presented too many issues in his petition to be specifically addressed on an individual basis, Petitioner hereby objects to any/all 1 CASE NUMBER: 05-71831 HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

recommendations made by the magistrate not in his favor. Thus preserving any/all issue(s) for further review." "[A] general objection to a magistrate's report, which fails to specify the issues of contention, does not satisfy the requirement that an objection be filed." Miller v. Currie, 50 F.3d 373, 380 (6th Cir. 1995) (citing Howard v. Sec'y of Health & Human Services, 932 F.2d 505, 508-09 (6th Cir. 1991)); see also Cowherd v. Million, 380 F.3d 909, 912 (6th Cir. 2004) ("the failure to file specific objections to a magistrate's report constitutes a waiver of those objections") (citing Miller, 50 F.3d at 380). Because Petitioner's objections are too general for de novo review, See Stoddard v. United States, 2009 WL 3199065 at *2 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 30, 2009) ("This Court reviews de novo those portions of a[] [Report and Recommendation] to which specific objections are made"), the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation; Petitioner's application for the writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. See Slater v. Potter, 2002 WL 172726 at **1 (6th Cir. Feb. 1, 2002) ("The filing of vague, general, or conclusory objections does not meet the requirement of specific objections and is tantamount to a complete failure to object") (citing Miller, 50 F.3d at 380). IT IS ORDERED. s/Victoria A. Roberts Victoria A. Roberts United States District Judge Dated: December 9, 2009

2

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this document was served on the attorneys of record and Todd Sondey by electronic means or U.S. Mail on December 9, 2009. s/Linda Vertriest Deputy Clerk

3