Jones v. United States

Opinion

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

9 Douglas Allen Jones, No. CV-24-08076-PCT-SMB

10 Petitioner, No. CR-18-08040-001-PCT-SMB

11 v. ORDER

12 United States of America,

13 Respondent. 14 15 United States Magistrate Judge Deborah Fine has issued a report and 16 recommendations (“R&R”) (Doc. 39) recommending that the Amended § 2255 Motion 17 (Doc. 26) be denied with prejudice without an evidentiary hearing and that the Clerk of 18 Court be directed to terminate this matter. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that 19 they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R. (R&R at 29-30) (citing Rule 72, 20 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) No objection has been filed, which relieves the Court 21 of its obligation to review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 22 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 23 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the pleadings and agrees with 24 the analysis of Magistrate Judge Fine. The Court will accept and adopt the R&R. 25 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the 26 Magistrate Judge (Docs. 39) is accepted. 27 … 28 … 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Amended § 2255 Motion (Doc. 26) || with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate this case. 3 Dated this 18th day of March, 2025. 4 . 5 SO ts 6 A lonorable Susan M. Brnovich United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-