Free Order Adopting Report and Recommendations - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

WO

IN THE UNITED S TATES DIS TRICT COURT FOR THE DIS TRICT OF ARIZONA

Kenneth Plante, Petitioner, v. Terry L. Stewart, et al.,

12 Respondent(s). 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV 02-2022-PHX-DGC (M S) ORDER

Pending before the Court is United Stat es M agistrate Judge M orton Sitver's Report and Recommendation ("R&R") Doc. #24. The R&R recommends that t he Court deny the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Doc. #1. The

M agistrate Judge advised the parties that they had ten days t o file objections to the R&R and that the failure to timely file objections to any determination of the M agistrate Judge would be considered a waiver of the right to de novo review of such determination. R&R at 20 (citing 28 U .S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). The Court granted Petitioner a forty-five day extension to file his objection to the R&R on or before September 19, 2005. Doc. #27. To date, no objection has been filed. Because the Petitioner did not file objections, the Court is relieved of it s obligation to review t he 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 object ion."). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that

Case 2:02-cv-02022-DGC

Document 28

Filed 10/04/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

it is well taken.

T he Court will accept 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"). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that M agistrate Judge M ort on Sitver's R&R (Doc. #24) is accepted. IT IS FURTHER O RD ERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1) is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. DATED this 3rd day of October, 2005.

-2-

Case 2:02-cv-02022-DGC

Document 28

Filed 10/04/2005

Page 2 of 2