Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01806/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-01806-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Daniel Lee Mellinger, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Warden Graber, 

Respondent. 

No. CV 14-1806-PHX-DGC (MHB) 

ORDER 

Petitioner Daniel Lee Mellinger has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Doc. 1. United States Magistrate Judge Michelle Burns 

has issued a report and recommendation that the petition be denied (“R&R”). Doc. 31. 

Petitioner has filed a document titled “No Objection to the R&R, with Corrections to 

Error in some Facts.” Doc. 32. Petitioner states: “Petitioner has no real objection to the 

conclusions reached in the R&R because he understands that the 9th Circuit’s law on the 

235(b)(3) issue goes against him. . . . That is why he asked months ago to have this Court 

deny his habeas as long as he can appeal and try to show the 9th Circuit the error of it’s 

conclusions.” Id. at 1.1

Because no objection has been filed, the Court is relieved of any obligation to 

review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Thomas v. Arn, 

 

1

 Although Petitioner later makes assertions that appear to disagree with Judge Burns’ conclusion, he simply restates arguments made before Judge Burns without 

explaining why her ruling on those arguments is incorrect. Petitioner also points out some alleged factual errors that do not affect the ruling in this case. 

Case 2:14-cv-01806-DGC Document 34 Filed 09/22/15 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 

474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 

2003). The Court will accept the R&R and deny the petition. 

 IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied. 

2. Petitioner’s Motion to Rule and Allow Appeal (Doc. 29) is denied as moot. 

3. Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 26) is denied. 

Dated this 22nd day of September, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-01806-DGC Document 34 Filed 09/22/15 Page 2 of 2