Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-02763/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-02763-1/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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Gustavo J. Olson, 

Defendant/Movant.

No. CV-16-02763-PHX-GMS

No. CR-09-01045-PHX-GMS 

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is Defendant/Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or 

Correct Sentence and United States Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle’s Report and 

Recommendation (“R&R”). Docs. 1, 13. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the 

Motion. Doc. 13 at 5. 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 5 (citing Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 72, 6(a), 6(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. 6(a), 6(b) and 72 (“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 

Case 2:16-cv-02763-GMS Document 14 Filed 03/16/17 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 

well-taken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny the motion and dismiss with 

prejudice. 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 HEREBY ORDERED:

 1. Magistrate Judge Boyle’s R&R (Doc. 13) is accepted. 

 2. Defendant/Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence 

(Doc. 1) is denied and this action is dismissed with prejudice. 

 3. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the 

event Movant files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability 

because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

 Dated this 16th day of March, 2017. 

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge

Case 2:16-cv-02763-GMS Document 14 Filed 03/16/17 Page 2 of 2