Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-01905/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-01905-1/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 

Steven Nietos,

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

No. CV-14-01905-TUC-FRZ

ORDER 

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

States Magistrate Judge Rateau that recommends dismissing Petitioner Steven Nieto’s 

Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 11]. A review of the record reflects 

that the parties have not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation and that 

the time to file objections has expired. As such, the Court will not consider any 

objections or new evidence. The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that 

Magistrate Judge Rateau’s recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 

1999); Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). Accordingly, the 

Court will adopt Magistrate Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation. 

 On November 23, 2015, Petitioner filed a “Notice of Extension of Time” wherein 

Petitioner provides the Court with notice that he “need[s] 90 days to get [his] paperwork 

right” to “file an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus[.]” See Doc. 20. The Court 

will construe Petitioner’s notice as a motion for an extension of time and, so construed, 

Case 4:14-cv-01905-FRZ Document 21 Filed 11/30/15 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 

the motion will be denied as moot. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 

 (1) Magistrate Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation [Doc. 19] is accepted 

and adopted; 

 (2) Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 11] is denied; 

 (3) In accordance with Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the 

United States District Courts, a certificate of appealability is denied with respect to all 

grounds for relief asserted in this federal habeas action; 

 (4) Petitioner’s request for an extension of time to file another amended petition 

for writ of habeas corpus [Doc. 20] is denied; and 

 (5) This action is dismissed with prejudice and the Clerk of the Court is directed to 

close this case. 

 Dated this 25th day of November, 2015. 

 

 

 

Case 4:14-cv-01905-FRZ Document 21 Filed 11/30/15 Page 2 of 2