From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cheers v. Hudson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Nov 19, 2007
Case No. 1:06 CV 1455 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 19, 2007)

Opinion

Case No. 1:06 CV 1455.

November 19, 2007


ORDER


The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc No. 13) filed October 31, 2007. Under the relevant statute ( 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (1982)):

Within ten 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.

In this case, the ten-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed. The failure to file written objections constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir. 2005).

The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 13) in its entirety. The Petition for Writ of Habeas (Doc. No. 1) is dismissed for lack of prosecution.

Petitioner has failed to show the existence of any set of facts upon which he could prevail. Accordingly, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the Court certifies that an appeal of this action could not be taken in good faith. Further, as Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, no certificate of appealability shall issue

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Cheers v. Hudson

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Nov 19, 2007
Case No. 1:06 CV 1455 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 19, 2007)
Case details for

Cheers v. Hudson

Case Details

Full title:Guy Cheers, Petitioner, v. Stuart Hudson, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: Nov 19, 2007

Citations

Case No. 1:06 CV 1455 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 19, 2007)