MELLINGER v. GRABER, CV 14-1806-PHX-DGC (MHB). (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20150923780
Visitors: 22
Filed: Sep. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2015
Summary: ORDER DAVID G. CAMPBELL , District Judge . Petitioner Daniel Lee Mellinger has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Doc. 1. United States Magistrate Judge Michelle Burns has issued a report and recommendation that the petition be denied ("R&R"). Doc. 31. Petitioner has filed a document titled "No Objection to the R&R, with Corrections to Error in some Facts." Doc. 32. Petitioner states: "Petitioner has no real objection to the conclusions reached in the R
Summary: ORDER DAVID G. CAMPBELL , District Judge . Petitioner Daniel Lee Mellinger has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Doc. 1. United States Magistrate Judge Michelle Burns has issued a report and recommendation that the petition be denied ("R&R"). Doc. 31. Petitioner has filed a document titled "No Objection to the R&R, with Corrections to Error in some Facts." Doc. 32. Petitioner states: "Petitioner has no real objection to the conclusions reached in the R&..
More
ORDER
DAVID G. CAMPBELL, District Judge.
Petitioner Daniel Lee Mellinger has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Doc. 1. United States Magistrate Judge Michelle Burns has issued a report and recommendation that the petition be denied ("R&R"). Doc. 31. Petitioner has filed a document titled "No Objection to the R&R, with Corrections to Error in some Facts." Doc. 32. Petitioner states: "Petitioner has no real objection to the conclusions reached in the R&R because he understands that the 9th Circuit's law on the 235(b)(3) issue goes against him. . . . That is why he asked months ago to have this Court deny his habeas as long as he can appeal and try to show the 9th Circuit the error of it's conclusions." Id. at 1.1
Because no objection has been filed, the Court is relieved of any obligation to review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). The Court will accept the R&R and deny the petition.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied.
2. Petitioner's Motion to Rule and Allow Appeal (Doc. 29) is denied as moot.
3. Petitioner's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 26) is denied.
FootNotes
1. Although Petitioner later makes assertions that appear to disagree with Judge Burns' conclusion, he simply restates arguments made before Judge Burns without explaining why her ruling on those arguments is incorrect. Petitioner also points out some alleged factual errors that do not affect the ruling in this case.
Source: Leagle
