Nuriddin Toshboltaev v. ICE, et al.

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

NURIDDIN TOSHBOLTAEV, CASE NO. 4:25 CV 2253 Petitioner, v. JUDGE JAMES R. KNEPP II ICE, et al., MEMORANDUM OPINION AND Respondents. ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) to grant Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss Petitioner Nuriddin Toshboltaev’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 6).

Under the relevant statute: Within fourteen days after being served with a copy [of a Magistrate Judge’s R&R], any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2). The failure to file timely written objections to a Magistrate Judge’s R&R constitutes a waiver of de novo review by the district court of any issues covered in the R&R. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813, 814-15 (6th Cir. 1984); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

In this case, the R&R was issued on January 15, 2026, and it is now February 20, 2026.

Petitioner has neither filed objections nor requested an extension of time to file them. Despite the lack of objections, the Court has reviewed Judge Clay’s R&R, and agrees with the findings and recommended rulings therein. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS Judge Clay’s R&R (Doc. 6) as the Order of this Court, GRANTS Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 5), and DISMISSES Petitioner’s Petition (Doc. 1) without prejudice as set forth therein.

The Court further finds an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ James R. Knepp II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: February 20, 2026