Opinion
1:19-cv-58
03-07-2022
LONNIE THOMPSON, PETITIONER, v. WARDEN CHARMAINE BRACY, RESPONDENT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HONORABLE SARA LIOI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Petitioner Lonnie Thompson (“petitioner” or “Thompson”) filed the instant action seeking habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“petition”). (Doc. No. 1.) Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge recommending that the petition be denied. (Doc. No. 29.)
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).
A copy of the R&R was mailed to Thompson at his address of record on January 14, 2022. Thompson requested and received an extension of time to file a response to the R&R. (See Doc. No. 30 and Order [non-document] dated February 1, 2022.)
This extension enlarged Thompson's time to respond to the R&R until March 1, 2022. As of the date of this Memorandum Opinion, Thompson has not filed an objection or any response to the R&R.
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 any 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 is DENIED. The Court CERTIFIES that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). This case is closed.
IT IS SO ORDERED