Loff 086772 v. Shinn ( 2020 )

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Darrick Michael Loff, No. CV-18-08180-PCT-DLR 10 Petitioner, ORDER 11 v. 12 Charles L Ryan, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 16 Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Michelle H. Burns’ Report and 17 Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 22), which recommends that Petitioner’s Amended 18 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied and dismissed with prejudice and that a 19 Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied. The 20 Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the 21 R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to 22 obtain review of the R&R. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 23 Cir. 2003). Neither party filed objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to 24 review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 25 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 26 not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 27 determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 28 objected to.”). “Unless this court has definite and firm conviction that the [Magistrate || Judge] committed a clear error of judgment, [this court] will not disturb [the] decision.” Jackson v. Bank of Hawaii, 902 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1990) (citation omitted). 3 The Court has nonetheless independently reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well- taken. The Court therefore will accept the R&R in its entirety. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) || (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 6|| findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The 7\|| district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further 8 || evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”’). 9 IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Burns’ R&R (Doc. 22) is ACCEPTED. 10 || Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied and the case is dismissed. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to 12 || proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and terminate the case. 15 Dated this 11th day of February, 2020. 16 17 18 {Z, 19 _- Ch 20 Upited States Dictric Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _2-