Ford v. Hill ( 2024 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION DAEMON N. FORD, ) CASE NO. 5:21-cv-01618 ) PETITIONER, ) CHIEF JUDGE SARA LIOI ) vs. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) WARDEN LEON HILL, ) ) RESPONDENT. ) Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in the above-entitled action. 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). In this case, the fourteen-day period, which was extended by three days pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), has elapsed and no objections have been filed. 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 an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), affd, 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 for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 11, 2024 Bt oe HONORABLE SARA LIOI CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT