Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08024/USCOURTS-azd-3_14-cv-08024-1/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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Thomas Mongeon, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Respondents.

No. CV-14-08024-PCT-JAT

ORDER 

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

(“Petition”) (Doc. 1). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation 

(“R&R”) (Doc. 14) recommending that the Petition be denied. 

 Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby 

accepts the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district 

courts are not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the 

subject of an objection” (emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 

1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review 

the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but 

not otherwise” (emphasis in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 

1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003). 

 Based on the foregoing, 

 IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 

14) is ACCEPTED; accordingly, 

Case 3:14-cv-08024-JAT Document 15 Filed 07/15/15 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 

 $ Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied 

and dismissed with prejudice, 

 $ in the event Petitioner files an appeal, issuance of a certificate of 

appealability is denied because denial of the petition is based on a plain procedural bar 

and jurists of reason would not find this Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. 

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000), and 

 $ the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with 

prejudice. 

 Dated this 15th day of July, 2015. 

Case 3:14-cv-08024-JAT Document 15 Filed 07/15/15 Page 2 of 2