Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-02286/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-02286-1/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 

Ruben Nevarez, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

No. CV-13-02286-PHX-DLR

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court are Petitioner Ruben Nevarez’s Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus and United States Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf’s Report and 

Recommendation (“R&R”). (Docs. 1, 23.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny 

the Petition. (Doc. 23 at 44.) 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 44 (citing 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 welltaken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny 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 

Case 2:13-cv-02286-DLR Document 24 Filed 01/12/15 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 

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 that Magistrate Judge Metcalf’s R&R (Doc. 23) is accepted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas 

Corpus (Doc. 1) is dismissed. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 

 Dated this 12th day of January, 2015. 

Douglas L. Rayes 

United States District Judge

Case 2:13-cv-02286-DLR Document 24 Filed 01/12/15 Page 2 of 2