Johnson v. Bennett

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT TACOMA 7 MELVIN MARCUS JOHNSON JR., CASE NO. 3:23-cv-05585-BHS 8 Petitioner, ORDER 9 v. 11 Respondent. 12 13 THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Grady J. Leupold’s 14 Report and Recommendation (R&R), Dkt. 6, recommending that the Court dismiss pro se 15 petitioner Melvin Marcus Johnson, Jr.’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, Dkt. 1, for 16 failure to prosecute. Johnson has not objected, or otherwise attempted to pursue the 17 petition he filed in June 2023. 18 A district court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report 19 or specified proposed finding or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 20 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (emphasis added); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). “The statute 21 makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and 22 recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. 1 Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). A proper objection requires 2 “specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations” in the R&R.

3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). 4 The R&R is ADOPTED. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice for 5 failure to prosecute. 6 The Clerk shall enter a JUDGMENT and close the case. 8 Dated this 2nd day of November, 2023. A 9 10 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE 11 United States District Judge

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22