UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION

FRANCISCO ALBERTO CALERO, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No.: 4:19-cv-639-MHH-GMB ) WILLIAM BARR, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On August 16, 2019, the magistrate judge filed a report in which he recommended that this petition for habeas corpus relief filed pursuant to

be dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 17). The magistrate judge advised Mr. Calero of his right to file objections to the report within 14 days. (Doc. 17, pp. 7-9). The Court has not received objections from Mr. Calero, and Mr. Calero did not respond to the Court’s June 2019 show cause order concerning his petition. (Doc. 16). A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1)(C). A district court reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error factual findings to which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn,

, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also LoConte v. Dugger,

(11th Cir. 1988); Macort v. Prem, Inc.,

(11th Cir. 2006). The Court agrees that Mr. Calero’s April 29, 2019 § 2241 petition is premature under § 1231 and Zadvydas. Therefore, the Court accepts the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismisses this action without prejudice. A separate order will be entered. DONE this 21st day of October, 2019.

adits Bi Hosa fades Se Pr _ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE