Filed: May 10, 2018
Latest Update: May 10, 2018
Summary: ORDER STEVEN P. LOGAN , District Judge . Petitioner Mark-Anthony Curtis has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 (Doc. 1). The Honorable John Z. Boyle, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 20), recommending that the Court deny the Petition. Judge Boyle advised the parties that they had fourteen (14) days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the r
Summary: ORDER STEVEN P. LOGAN , District Judge . Petitioner Mark-Anthony Curtis has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 (Doc. 1). The Honorable John Z. Boyle, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 20), recommending that the Court deny the Petition. Judge Boyle advised the parties that they had fourteen (14) days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the ri..
More
ORDER
STEVEN P. LOGAN, District Judge.
Petitioner Mark-Anthony Curtis has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). The Honorable John Z. Boyle, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 20), recommending that the Court deny the Petition. Judge Boyle advised the parties that they had fourteen (14) days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Doc. 20) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). Petitioner requested extensions of time to file an objection, which the Court granted, setting May 4, 2018 as the deadline. (Docs. 23, 26, 29.)
To date, no party has filed an objection, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) ("[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection."); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) ("The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to."). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will adopt the R&R and deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate"); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) ("The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.").
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. That Magistrate Judge Boyle's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) is accepted and adopted by the Court;
2. That the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is denied and dismissed with prejudice;
3. That a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied; and
4. That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.
