Reyes v. Pugh

Filing 19

Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation (Doc. No. 18 ) and adopts the same. Accordingly, respondent's motion to dismiss the petition for habeas relief (Doc. No. 13 ) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2241, is granted. Judge Sara Lioi on 8/4/2015. (P,J)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
ALFONSO CERVANTES REYES,
PETITIONER,
vs.
MICHAEL PUGH, WARDEN,
RESPONDENT.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 4:14-cv-1086
JUDGE SARA LIOI
MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court upon the recommendation of Magistrate Judge
Burke that the respondent’s motion to dismiss petitioner’s habeas corpus action be granted. (Doc.
No. 18 [“R&R”].)1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, petitioner challenges the calculation of his
sentence by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. (Doc. Nos. 1 and 9 [“Petition”].) The petitioner
requested and received two extensions of time to respond to the respondent’s motion to dismiss,
but no response was filed by petitioner. (See Doc. No. 15 and Non-document order May 5, 2015.)
Under the relevant statute:
[. . .] Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party
may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and
recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court
shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or
specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection
is made.
28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C).

1

Petitioner was mailed a copy of Magistrate Burke’s report and recommendation on July 15, 2015. No objection has
been filed, and petitioner has not sought an extension of time to file objections.

In this case, the statutory time period has elapsed and no objection has been filed to
the R&R. The failure to file written objections to a Magistrate Judge=s report and recommendation
constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an issue covered in the
report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff=d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see United States
v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge=s report and recommendation and
adopts the same. Accordingly, respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition for habeas relief
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 4, 2015
HONORABLE SARA LIOI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2