Smith 252757 v. Hetmer

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

9 Christopher Lee Smith, No. CV-23-00126-PHX-MTL (ASB) 10 Petitioner, ORDER v. Lance Hetmer, et al., 13 Respondents.

15 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Alison S.

16 Bachus (“R & R”) (Doc. 18) recommending that Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc.

17 15) be denied. Respondents have not filed any objections to the R & R. The deadline to do so passed fourteen days following service of the R & R, which issued on December 8, 2023. Four weeks have now passed.

20 In reviewing an R & R, the Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

22 “[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge's finding and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that the District Court need not conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”). No objections having been received, the Court will accept and adopt the R & R in its entirety.

28 Accordingly, 1 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is accepted.

2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) is || denied.

4 IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Respondents shall file an Answer to Petitioner’s 5|| Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) that (1) is limited to relevant affirmative 6|| defenses, including, but not limited to, statute of limitations, procedural bar, or non-retroactivity; (2) raises affirmative defenses as to some claims and discusses the merits || of others; or (3) discusses the merits of all claims no later than January 12, 2024.

9 Dated this 5th day of January, 2024.

Wichal T. Hburde Michael T. Liburdi 13 United States District Judge _2-