From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Khaimov v. Lucero

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
May 25, 2018
No. CV-17-02249-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. May. 25, 2018)

Opinion

No. CV-17-02249-PHX-GMS

05-25-2018

Lyudvig Khaimov, Petitioner, v. Enrique M Lucero, et al., Respondents.


ORDER

Pending before the Court are Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) and United States Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett's Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), which recommends dismissal of the Petition. (Doc. 14.) The R&R recommends that the Court dismiss the Petition without prejudice. (Doc. 14 at 2.) The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 2-3 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)).

The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the 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 objection."); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) ("The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to."). The Court will accept the R&R and dismiss the Petition without prejudice. 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"); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) ("The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.").

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Magistrate Judge Willett's R&R (Doc. 14) is ACCEPTED.

2. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

3. The Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE this action.

4. Because this case arises under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, no ruling on a certificate of appealability is required.

Dated this 25th day of May, 2018.

/s/_________

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Khaimov v. Lucero

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
May 25, 2018
No. CV-17-02249-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. May. 25, 2018)
Case details for

Khaimov v. Lucero

Case Details

Full title:Lyudvig Khaimov, Petitioner, v. Enrique M Lucero, et al., Respondents.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Date published: May 25, 2018

Citations

No. CV-17-02249-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. May. 25, 2018)