Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01146/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01146-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Raymond G. Ochoa, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-1146-PHX-GMS (BPV)

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and

United States Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco’s Report and Recommendation

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

12 at 8. 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 8 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); 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

Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will

Case 2:08-cv-01146-GMS Document 13 Filed 10/27/09 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 -

accept the R&R and dismiss the Petition. 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 Bernardo P. Velasco’s R&R (Dkt. # 12) is ACCEPTED.

2. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. # 1) is DISMISSED.

3. The Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE this action.

DATED this 27th day of October, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-01146-GMS Document 13 Filed 10/27/09 Page 2 of 2