Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00313/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00313-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Rene Sfrantzy, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Eric Holder,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV08-0313 PHX-DGC (JJM)

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Petitioner Rene Sfrantzy’s petition for writ of habeas

corpus and United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline J. Marshall’s Report and

Recommendation (“R&R”). Dkt. ##1, 12. The R&R recommends that the Court dismiss the

petition with prejudice because Petitioner has been removed from the United States rendering

the petition moot. Dkt. #12 at 1-2. 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 3 (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

Case 2:08-cv-00313-DGC Document 14 Filed 11/10/09 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 -

Court will accept the R&R and dismiss the Petition with prejudice. 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 Jacqueline J. Marshall’s R&R (Dkt. #12) is accepted.

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

dismissed with prejudice.

3. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.

DATED this 9th day of November, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-00313-DGC Document 14 Filed 11/10/09 Page 2 of 2