Opinion
5:21-cv-01618
06-11-2024
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SARA LIOI CHIEF JUDGE
Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in the above-entitled action. Under the relevant statute:
[. . .] Within fourteen 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.28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In this case, the fourteen-day period, which was extended by three days pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(d), has elapsed and no objections have been filed. The failure to file written objections to a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff=d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation and adopts the same. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.