Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-01958/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-01958-2/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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

MICHAEL ANTHONY HATCHER,

Petitioner,

vs.

DORA SCHRIRO, et.al.,

Respondent, 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-1958-PHX-SMM (JM) 

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND

ORDER

 Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed

under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (Doc. 1). The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline

Marshall for Report and Recommendation (Doc. 2). On October 8, 2009 the Magistrate

Judge filed a Report and Recommendation with this Court (Doc. 19). To date, no objections

have been filed.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v. Sullivan,

923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have ten days from the service of a copy of the

Magistrate's recommendation within which to file specific written objections to the Court.

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s

recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s

factual findings and waives all objections to those findings on appeal. See Turner v. Duncan,

158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is

Case 2:07-cv-01958-SMM Document 20 Filed 11/10/09 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 -

a factor to be weighed in considering the propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal.”

Id.

DISCUSSION

Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and no

Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and adopts

the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth,

 IT IS ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge (Doc. 19).

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

(Doc. 1) is DENIED and dismissed with prejudice, terminating this case.

DATED this 9th day of November, 2009.

Case 2:07-cv-01958-SMM Document 20 Filed 11/10/09 Page 2 of 2