Boyd v. Dulgov ( 2023 )

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Andre Deshawn Boyd, No. CV-22-00410-TUC-JCH 10 Petitioner, ORDER 11 v. 12 A. Dulgov, 13 Respondent. 14 15 On September 12, 2022, Petitioner Boyd filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas 16 Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Doc. 1. On November 15, 2022, the Court referred the 17 matter to Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro for a Report and Recommendation. See 18 Doc. 5 at 3. On December 13, 2022, Respondent Dulgov filed an answer. Doc. 12. 19 Petitioner did not reply or move to extend the deadline. See docket generally. 20 Before the Court is Judge Ferraro's March 1, 2023 Report and Recommendation 21 (R&R). Doc. 15. Judge Ferraro recommends the Court deny and dismiss the Petition 22 (Doc. 1). Doc. 15 at 4. The R&R explains that parties may file written objections to the 23 R&R within 14 days of service. Id. The R&R warns that failure to object could be 24 deemed a waiver of any objection. Id. Neither party objected. See docket generally. 25 On March 14, 2023, a copy of the R&R mailed to Petitioner was returned 26 "Undeliverable" due to "Transferred/Discharged – Unable to Forward." Doc. 16. The 27 Court's Order requiring Respondent to answer the Petition warned that Petitioner "must 28 file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule 83.3(d) of the 1 || Local Rules of Civil Procedure." Doc. 5 at 1. The Order further warned that if "Petitioner □□ fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these warnings, the 3 || Court may dismiss this actions without further notice." Jd. at 2. 4} I. Legal Standard 5 A district court reviews objected-to portions of an R&R de novo. 28 U.S.C. 6|| § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 7\| (9th Cir. 1989). Failure to timely object may be considered a waiver of a party's right to 8 || de novo consideration of the issues. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121- 22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). If. Analysis 11 The Court has reviewed Judge Ferraro's R&R and finds its facts, analysis, and 12 || conclusions are without error. The Court will adopt the R&R in full. The Court also notes 13 || that even if it did not adopt the R&R, it would dismiss Petitioner's case for failure to || comply with a court order. 15} I. Order 16 Accordingly, 17 IT IS ORDERED ADOPTING the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 15). 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING the Petition (Doc. 1). 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DISMISSING this case. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. 21 Dated this 21st day of March, 2023. 22 23 ‘ 24 WS HM LherLa _ onorable John C. Hinderaker 25 United States District Judge 26 27 28 _2-