Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-00095/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-00095-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence

---

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 1

 All document numbers are in the CV case number.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff/Respondent, 

vs.

Hector Macias-Gomez,

Defendant/Movant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 11-382-PHX-JAT

CV 13-0095-PHX-JAT (BSB)

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc.1

 1). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and

Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 10) recommending that the Motion be denied. 

Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts

the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not

required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”

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

banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s

findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis

in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003).

Accordingly,

Case 2:13-cv-00095-JAT Document 11 Filed 11/05/13 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 -

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 10)

is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED specifically:

• Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1) is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE; and the Clerk of

the Court shall enter judgment accordingly;

• the Court denies issuance of a certificate of appealability.

DATED this 5th day of November, 2013.

Case 2:13-cv-00095-JAT Document 11 Filed 11/05/13 Page 2 of 2