Opinion
CV-21-02162-PHX-SPL
12-05-2022
Brian Woolsey, Petitioner, v. David Shinn, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
Honorable Steven P. Logan, United States District Judge
Petitioner Brian Woolsey has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). The Honorable Eileen S. Willett, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 21), recommending that the Court dismiss Ground One and the first subsection of Ground Two with prejudice and deny the second subsection of Ground Two. Judge Willett advised the parties that they had fourteen (14) 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. (Doc. 21 at 17) (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 has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will adopt the R&R and deny the Petition. 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.”). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
Petitioner requested two extensions (D ocs. 22, 24) which were granted (Docs. 23, 25). No objection, however, was filed on the docket.
1. That Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is accepted and adopted by the Court;
2. That Ground One and the first subsection of Ground Two of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) are dismissed with prejudice and the second subsection of Ground Two is denied;
3. The Petitioner's request for an evidentiary hearing (Doc. 1 at 15) is denied;
4. That a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied; and
5. That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.