Cortez Delano Peterson v. Warden Angela Stuff

PEARSON, J.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

CORTEZ DELANO PETERSON, ) ) CASE NO. 3:25-cv-679 Petitioner, ) ) v. ) JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON ) WARDEN ANGELA STUFF, ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND Respondent. ) ORDER ) [Resolving ECF Nos. 5 and 8]

Petitioner Cortez Delano Peterson submitted a petition for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. He has since filed two motions: (1) a Motion to Stay for 60 Days (ECF No. 5); and (2) a Motion to Stay and Abeyance or Dismiss (ECF No. 8).

On January 2, 2026, the assigned magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation to deny Petitioner’s Motion to Stay (ECF No. 5) and deny in part and grant in part the Motion to Stay or Dismiss (ECF No. 8). ECF No. 10. Regarding the Motion to Stay or Dismiss (ECF No. 8), the magistrate judge recommends the Court deny the motion to stay and grant the motion to dismiss without prejudice and equitably toll the statute of limitations. ECF No. 10.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. In the instant case, objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by January 16, 2026. Neither party has timely filed objections, nor requested an extension of time to do so. Any further review by the Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949–50 (6th Cir. 1981).

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge is hereby adopted.

Petitioner’s Motion to Stay (ECF No. 5) is denied. Petitioner’s Motion to Stay or Dismiss (ECF No. 8) is denied as to the motion to stay, and granted as to the motion to dismiss. The petition (ECF No. 1) is dismissed without prejudice. The Court further adopts the magistrate judge’s recommendations concerning equitable tolling, in that, such tolling applies to the claims in the Petition only if Petitioner: (1) initiates proceedings to exhaust his state court remedies relating to the nunc pro tunc entry described in his Motion to Stay or Dismiss (ECF No. 8) not later than 30 days of this Order; and (2) returns to seek habeas relief from the federal courts not later than 30 days after exhausting those state court remedies. ECF No. 10 at PageID #: 1095.

The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed R. App. P. 22(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

January 26, 2026 /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Date Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge