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

 Movant Rebekah Ezilda Robertson has filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or 

Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(“Motion”) (Doc. 1). On October 12, 2016, the Honorable James F. Metcalf, United 

States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending 

that the Court deny the Motion. Judge Metcalf advised the parties that they had fourteen 

(14) 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. (Doc. 24 at 4); 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; 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 

United States of America, 

 

 Plaintiff/Respondent, 

vs. 

Rebekah Ezilda Robertson, 

 Defendant/Movant. 

 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. CV-16-00127-PHX-SPL 

(No. CR-14-00272-4-PHX-SPL) 

ORDER 

Case 2:16-cv-00127-SPL Document 25 Filed 10/31/16 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 

objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is welltaken. The Court will adopt 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.”). Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. That Magistrate Judge Metcalf’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 24) is 

accepted and adopted by the Court; 

2. That the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in 

Federal Custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (CV-16-00127-PHX-SPL, Doc. 1; Doc. 

223, CR-14-00272-PHX-SPL) is denied; 

3. That this case is dismissed with prejudice; 

4. That a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on 

appeal are denied because jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling 

debatable; 

5. That the Clerk of Court shall file this Order in the underlying related criminal 

action, Case No. CR-14-00272-PHX-SPL; and 

6. That the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and terminate this 

action. 

 Dated this 31st day of October, 2016.

Honorable Steven P. Logan

United States District Judge

Case 2:16-cv-00127-SPL Document 25 Filed 10/31/16 Page 2 of 2