Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02121/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02121-1/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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

David Najimias-Nacach,1

Petitioner, 

v. 

Louis Winn, 

Respondent.

No. CV-14-02121-TUC-RM

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate 

Judge Leslie A. Bowman (Doc. 34). In her Report and Recommendation, Judge Bowman 

recommends that this Court dismiss Petitioner’s Petition because he has received all of 

the pre-trial credit to which he is entitled. No objections were filed. 

 A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a 

magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which 

objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(C). The advisory committee notes to Rule 

72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is 

filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record 

in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. See also Prior v. Ryan, 

2012 WL 1344286, *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 8, 2012) (reviewing for clear error unobjected-to 

portions of Report and Recommendation); Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 

 

1

 Petitioner is also known as “David Herrera-Roman.” The Court uses the name 

“David Najimias-Nacach” because that is the name listed on the docket. 

Case 4:14-cv-02121-RM Document 36 Filed 04/20/16 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 

739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the district judge 

reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”). 

 Reviewing for clear error, this Court finds no error in Judge Bowman’s thorough 

and carefully reasoned Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 

 1. Magistrate Judge Leslie A. Bowman’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 

34) is accepted and adopted. 

 2. Petitioner’s Second Amended Petition (Doc. 26) is denied and this action is 

dismissed. 

 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 

 Dated this 19th day of April, 2016. 

Honorable Rosemary Márquez

United States District Judge

 

Case 4:14-cv-02121-RM Document 36 Filed 04/20/16 Page 2 of 2