Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02079/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02079-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Orlando Rios-Lagarrata
Plaintiff
United States of America
Defendant

Document Text:

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

United States of America, 

Plaintiff-Respondent, 

v.

Orlando Rios-Lagarrata, 

Defendant-Movant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR-05-1042-PHX-EHC

No. CV-07-2079-GMS (JCG)

ORDER

Pending before the Court are Plaintiff-Respondent’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or

Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody and United States Magistrate Judge

Guerin’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Dkt. ## 1, 10). The R&R recommends that

the Court deny the motion. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had ten days

to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered

a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 6 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.

R. Civ. P. 72(b) 6(a) and 6(e); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.

2003)).

The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review

the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)

(“Section 636(b)(1) does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the

subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de

novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The

Case 2:07-cv-02079-GMS Document 12 Filed 08/27/09 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 -

Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will

accept the R&R and deny the motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district

court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations

made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject,

or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the

magistrate judge with instructions.”).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Magistrate Judge Guerin’s R&R (Dkt. # 10) is accepted.

2. Plaintiff-Respondent’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (Dkt

# 1) is denied.

3. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.

DATED this 26th day of August, 2009.

Case 2:07-cv-02079-GMS Document 12 Filed 08/27/09 Page 2 of 2