Bruce-Pino v. Unknown Party

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

9 Juan David Bruce-Pino, No. CV-24-00008-TUC-SHR (MAA) 10 Petitioner, Order Denying § 2241 Habeas Petition v. FCI Safford Low Warden, 13 Respondent.

15 On April 26, 2024, Magistrate Judge Michael A. Ambri issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending the Court deny Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Doc. 10 at 5.) The Magistrate Judge informed the parties they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and an additional fourteen days to respond.

19 (Id.) No objections have been filed and neither party has requested additional time to do so. 21 If neither party objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the District Court is not required to review the magistrate judge’s decision under any specified standard of review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); United States v. Reyna- Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (district court only needs to review magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made). However, the statute for review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.

1 In this case, the deadline for filing objections has passed. As noted, no objections 2|| have been filed, and neither party has requested additional time to do so. Consequently, || the Court may adopt the R&R on that basis alone. See Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 4}| 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (district court declined to review the magistrate judge’s || report because no objections were filed). Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed Petitioner’s 6|| Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1), the Respondent’s Return and Answer to Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 9), and Judge Ambri’s R&R. (Doc. || 10.) The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Ambri’s conclusions.

9|| Accordingly, 10 IT IS ORDERED Magistrate Judge Michael A. Ambri's Report and || Recommendation is ACCEPTED. (Doc. 10.)

12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 13} (Doc. 1) is DENIED.

14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment || accordingly and close the file in this case.

16 Dated this 23rd day of May, 2024.

18 /} Aa: hel 20 Honorable Scott H, Rash _/ United States District Judge _2-