Morales v. Eppinger

Filing 11

Memorandum of Opinion and Order. The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Related doc # 10 ). Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Related doc # 8 ) is granted. Petitioner's Petition is dismissed as tim e-barred. The Court finds an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Since Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right directly related to his conviction or custody, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Rule 11 of Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 12/28/2018. (H,CM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
MARCEL A. MORALES,
Petitioner,
vs.
WARDEN LaSHANN EPPINGER,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-2629
JUDGE CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO, J:
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Ruiz’s Report and Recommendation
(ECF DKT #10) to grant Respondent LaShann Eppinger’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF DKT #8)
and dismiss Petitioner Marcel Morales’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF DKT #1) as time-barred. Objections to the Report and Recommendation
were due by December 11, 2018. Petitioner has not filed an objection to the Report and
Recommendation.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides that objections to a report

and recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after service. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2).
Petitioner has failed to timely file any such objections. Therefore, the Court must assume that
Petitioner is satisfied with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. Any further review by this
Court would be duplicative and an inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge, GRANTS Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss and DISMISSES Petitioner’s Petition as
time-barred.
The Court finds an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3). Since Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional
right directly related to his conviction or custody, the Court declines to issue a certificate of
appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); FED. R. APP. P. 22(b); Rule 11 of Rules Governing § 2254
Cases.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Christopher A. Boyko
CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO
United States District Judge
Dated: December 28, 2018

-2-