Mejia v. Hudson

6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Ernesto Manuel Mejia, No. CV-24-00306-TUC-JCH 10 Petitioner, ORDER v. Unknown Hudson, 13 Respondent.

15 Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau's Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 11). Judge Rateau recommends denying Petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (the "Petition"). See id. at 12. No objections to the R&R were filed. See generally Docket.

20 A district court reviews objected-to portions of an R&R de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). Failure to timely object may be considered a waiver of a party's right to de novo consideration of the issues. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121–22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The advisory committee's notes to Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, "[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation" of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note to 1983 addition; see also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999).

1 After independent review, the Court is satisfied that Judge Rateau's || recommendation is sound. The Court will adopt the R&R in full.

3 Accordingly, 4 IT IS ORDERED adopting in full the R&R (Doc. 11).

5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Petition (Doc. 1). The Clerk of the || Court shall enter judgment and close this case.

7 Dated this 10th day of December, 2024.

9 f 4) 10 a HA ll / / John C. Hinderaker _/United States District Judge -2-