Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-02398/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-02398-2/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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Ramon Adrian Espinoza-Cuamea,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

United States of America,, 

Defendant.

No. CV-11-02398-PHX-GMS (MEA)

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct 

Sentence and United States Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey’s Report and 

Recommendation (“R&R”). Docs. 10, 12. The R&R recommends that the Court deny 

and dismiss with prejudice. Doc. 12 at 9. 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 

9-10 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); LRCiv 7.2; 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) (“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 accept 

Case 2:11-cv-02398-GMS Document 13 Filed 12/06/12 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

the R&R and deny the Motion. 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 (Doc. 12) is accepted. 

 2. Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (Doc. 10) is denied and

dismissed with prejudice. 

 3. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 

 4. A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). 

 Dated this 5th day of December, 2012. 

Case 2:11-cv-02398-GMS Document 13 Filed 12/06/12 Page 2 of 2