Opinion
2:21-cv-01105-RFB-EJY
01-27-2022
VICTOR E. GOMEZ, Plaintiff, v. CRAIG ESTEY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Richard F. Boulware, II United States District Judge
Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 3] of the Honorable Elayna J. Youchah, United States Magistrate Judge, entered August 4, 2021.
A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is required to “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); see also Local Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct “any review, ” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by August 18, 2021. No. objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's recommendations.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 3] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is dismissed without prejudice as barred by Heck v. Humphrey.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court send Plaintiff a copy of instructions pertaining to filing a habeas corpus petition so that, if he so chooses, Plaintiff may commence a new claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.