IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Raymond L. Dennard, Case No. 1:17CV1773

Petitioner

v. ORDER

James Haviland, Warden,

Respondent

This is a state prisoner’s habeas corpus case under

. Pending is Magistrate Judge Greenberg’s Report and Recommendation, which recommends that I deny the petition. (Doc. 22). The Magistrate Judge notified the parties that any objections to the R&R were due within fourteen days after the filing of his R&R, which occurred on February 15, 2019. Because the petitioner did not file an objection, he forfeited his right to de novo review of the R&R. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231,

, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). I need only “satisfy [myself] that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Bogan v. Morgan,

, *1 (N.D. Ohio 2012) (Gaughan, J.). Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s thorough analysis of the three grounds for relief in the petition, I am satisfied that the R&R properly disposes of this case. It is, therefore, ORDERED THAT: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22) be, and the same hereby is, adopted as the order of the court. 2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) be, and the same hereby is, denied. 3. No certificate of appealability will issue. So ordered.

/s/ James G. Carr Sr. U.S. District Judge