Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-01205/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-01205-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jon Gurule
Respondent
Abdou-Rachidou Tchassama
Petitioner

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 

Abdou-Rachidou Tchassama,

Petitioner, 

v. 

Jon Gurule, 

Respondent. 

No. CV-16-01205-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus and United States 

Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Docs. 1, 15. 

The R&R recommends that the Court dismiss without prejudice. Doc. 15 at 2. The 

Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen 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 2-3 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; United States v. ReynaTapia, 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 Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is welltaken. The Court will accept the R&R and dismiss the Petition without prejudice. See 28 

Case 2:16-cv-01205-GMS Document 17 Filed 02/17/17 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 

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 HEREBY ORDERED:

 1. Magistrate Judge Willett’s R&R (Doc. 15) is accepted. 

 2. The Petition (Doc. 1) is dismissed without prejudice. 

 3. Because this case arises under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, no ruling on a certificate 

of appealability is required. 

 Dated this 17th day of February, 2017. 

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge

Case 2:16-cv-01205-GMS Document 17 Filed 02/17/17 Page 2 of 2