Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01558/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01558-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 463
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Yohannez Antonnio, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Darren Monday,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-1558-PHX-GMS (MEA)

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and

United States Magistrate Judge Aspey’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Dkt. ## 1,

17. The R&R recommends that the Court dismiss the Petition with prejudice as moot. Dkt. #

17 at 3. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen 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 3 (citing 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 has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will

Case 2:09-cv-01558-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/23/10 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 -

accept the R&R and dismiss with prejudice as moot the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)

(stating that 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 Aspey’s R&R (Dkt. # 17) is ACCEPTED.

2. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. # 1) is DISMISSED

WITH PREJUDICE AS MOOT.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall TERMINATE this action.

DATED this 23rd day of March, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01558-GMS Document 19 Filed 03/23/10 Page 2 of 2