Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00891/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-00891-1/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

Louis MELENDEZ,

Petitioner, 

v. 

Warden Greg FIZER,

Respondent. _________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 05-891-PHX-SMM (VAM)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND 

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Petitioner Louis Melendez' Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus. [Doc. No. 1] On December 30, 2005, Magistrate Judge Virginia A. Mathis filed a

Report and Recommendation, advising this Court that Petitioner's Petition should be denied and

dismissed for failure to prosecute. [Doc. No. 13] Petitioner filed Objections on January 25,

2006. [Doc. No. 17] On February 22, 2006, this Court declined to adopt Judge Mathis' Report

and Recommendation because Petitioner had made affirmative efforts to pursue his case

following the Report and Recommendation. [Doc. No. 18] This Court referred the Petition back

to Judge Mathis for a Report and Recommendation on the merits of the Petition. Judge Mathis

filed her subsequent Report and Recommendation on March 29, 2006 [Doc. No. 19], but

Petitioner has not responded thereto. 

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 also Baxter v.

Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). The Court must review the legal analysis in the

Case 2:05-cv-00891-SMM Document 20 Filed 05/15/06 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 -

Report and Recommendation de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The Court must review

the factual analysis in the Report and Recommendation de novo for those facts to which

Objections are filed and for clear error for those facts to which no Objections are filed. See id.;

see also Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998) (failure to file objections relieves

the district court of conducting de novo review of the magistrate’s factual findings).

DISCUSSION

Having reviewed the legal conclusions of the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, and no objections having been made by Petitioner thereto, the Court hereby

incorporates and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above,

IT IS ORDERED that the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate

Judge Virginia A. Mathis [Doc. No. 19].

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc.

No. 1] is denied. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action accordingly.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order be sent to Magistrate Judge

Virginia A. Mathis.

DATED this 12th day of May, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-00891-SMM Document 20 Filed 05/15/06 Page 2 of 2