Opinion
CV-23-01195-PHX-MTL
06-04-2024
John Bradley, Petitioner, v. Unknown Party, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
MICHAEL T. LIBURDI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Camille D. Bibles (“R & R”) (Doc. 22) recommending that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) be denied. Petitioner has not filed any objections to the R & R. The deadline to do so passed fourteen days following service of the R & R, which was mailed to Petitioner on March 4, 2024.
In reviewing an R & R, the Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). “[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge's finding and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that the District Court need not conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”). No objections having been received, the Court will accept and adopt the R & R in its entirety. ...
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22) is accepted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case.