Meadows v. Sheldon
Filing
17
Memorandum Opinion and Order: The Court has reviewed the magistrate judge's R&R and accepts the same. Accordingly, the Court denies the petition in its entirety for the reasons set forth in the R&R. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Sara Lioi on 1/27/2020. (D,N)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER MEADOWS,
PETITIONER,
vs.
WARDEN ED SHELDON,
RESPONDENT.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 5:18-cv-1087
JUDGE SARA LIOI
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of a magistrate judge with
respect to the above-entitled petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. No. 16.) The R&R
recommends dismissal of the petition in its entirety because it is time-barred or, in the alternative,
procedurally defaulted.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C):
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. [. . .]
The R&R was filed on January 2, 2020, and was sent to petitioner that same day by regular
mail. As of the date of this order, no objections have been filed, no extension has been requested,
and no mail has been returned as undeliverable.
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), reh’g denied, 474
U.S. 1111 (1986); see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the magistrate judge’s R&R and accepts the same. Accordingly,
the Court denies the petition in its entirety for the reasons set forth in the R&R. Further, the Court
certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis
upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App.
P. 22(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 27, 2020
HONORABLE SARA LIOI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?