Irvin Villegas Garcia v. Unknown Party, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: November 13, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-03062
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Irvin Villegas Garcia, No. CV-24-03062-PHX-DWL

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 Unknown Party, et al.,

13 Respondents. 14 15 Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas 16 Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) and the Report and Recommendation 17 (“R&R”) of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 39). The R&R, which was issued 18 on October 10, 2025, recommends “that Grounds One and Two be denied on the merits, 19 Ground Three be dismissed without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court be directed to 20 terminate this matter.” (Doc. 39 at 10.) The R&R further provides that “[t]he parties shall 21 have fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of this recommendation within which 22 to file specific written objections with the Court.” (Doc. 23 at 17.) 23 Here, no such objections have been filed and the 14-day deadline has expired. Thus, 24 the Court adopts the R&R. See, e.g., Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985) (“It does 25 not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate’s factual 26 or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to 27 those findings.”); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (“[N]o 28 review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are filed.”). See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) 2|| (“[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations 3|| de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.”’). 4 Accordingly, 5 IT IS ORDERED that the R&R’s recommended disposition (Doc. 39) is accepted, || that the Amended Petition (Doc. 6) is denied in part and dismissed without prejudice in 7\| part, and that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability and leave to 9|| proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied because Petitioner has not made a 10 || substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 11 Dated this 12th day of November, 2025. 12 13 Lm ee” 14 f t _o———— Dominic W, Lanza 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-