Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02660/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02660-3/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

09cv2660

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLIFTON WAYNE MAXWELL, 

Petitioner,

v.

GEORGE A. NEOTTI, Warden.

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 09cv2660 L (BLM)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION AND

GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS [doc.

#15]

Petitioner Clifton Wayne Maxwell, a state prisoner, filed a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and later filed an amended petition. The case was referred to

United States Magistrate Judge Barbara L. Major for a report and recommendation (“Report”)

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 72.1(d). In the Report, the magistrate

judge recommended the granting of respondent’s motion to dismiss the first amended petition

because the amended petition is moot. . 

In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court “shall

make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made,”

and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made

by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Under this statute, “the district judge must

review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but

not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc)

Case 3:09-cv-02660-L-BLM Document 17 Filed 08/24/10 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

(emphasis in original); see Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1225-26 & n.5 (D. Ariz.

2003) (applying Reyna-Tapia to habeas review). 

Objections to the Report were to be filed by August 5, 2010. To date, neither party has

filed an objection to the Report. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and

Recommendation in its entirety and granting respondent’s motion to dismiss the first amended

petition for writ of habeas corpus.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 24, 2010

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

COPY TO: 

BARBARA L. MAJOR

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL COUNSEL/PARTIES

Case 3:09-cv-02660-L-BLM Document 17 Filed 08/24/10 Page 2 of 2