Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08058/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08058-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Aric Balistreri, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV09-8058 PCT-DGC (LOA)

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Petitioner Aric Balistreri’s petition for writ of habeas

corpus and United States Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson’s Report and

Recommendation (“R&R”). Dkt. ##1, 15. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the

petition because Petitioner has not presented any claim which entitles him to relief. Dkt. #15

at 28. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had ten days to file objections to

the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right

to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 29 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);

United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)).

The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review

the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)

(“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the

subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de

novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). 

The Court will accept the R&R and deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that

Case 3:09-cv-08058-DGC Document 16 Filed 12/03/09 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may

accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return

the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson’s R&R (Dkt. #15) is accepted.

2. Petitioner Aric Balistreri’s petition for writ of habeas corpus (Dkt. #1) is

denied.

3. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.

DATED this 3rd day of December, 2009.

Case 3:09-cv-08058-DGC Document 16 Filed 12/03/09 Page 2 of 2