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

Marcelo Sandoval, Case No. 4:19-cv-29

Petitioner,

v. ORDER

Mark Williams, Warden,

Respondent.

Before me is the January 16, 2020 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Parker, (Doc. No. 11), recommending I dismiss Petitioner Marcelo Sandoval’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under

as moot because Sandoval no longer is in custody pursuant to the conviction he challenged in that petition. Under the relevant statute, “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court.”

(b)(1); United States v. Walters,

(6th Cir. 1981). The fourteen-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed. The failure to file written objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation constitutes a waiver of a determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn,

(6th Cir. 1984), aff’d,

(1985); see also Walters,

(6th Cir. 1981); Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers, Local 231,

, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987) (“[O]nly those specific objections to the magistrate’s report made to the district court will be preserved for appellate review”). Following my review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, I adopt the Report and Recommendation, (Doc. No. 11), in its entirety as the Order of the Court and dismiss Sandoval’s petition. Further, I certify there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability.

; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). So Ordered.

s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge