Koreasa Maria Williams v. Unknown Gunther, et al.

D. Arizona

Koreasa Maria Williams v. Unknown Gunther, et al.

DecidedDecember 29, 2025

Docket2:25-cv-02534

StatusUnknown

This text of Koreasa Maria Williams v. Unknown Gunther, et al. (Koreasa Maria Williams v. Unknown Gunther, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Koreasa Maria Williams v. Unknown Gunther, et al., (D. Ariz. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

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

9 Koreasa Maria Williams, No. CV-25-02534-PHX-JJT

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 Unknown Gunther, et al.,

13 Respondents. 14 15 At issue is the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17, “R&R”) entered by United 16 States Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett recommending that the Court dismiss without 17 prejudice the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1, 18 “Petition”). In the R&R, Judge Willett advised the parties they “shall have fourteen days 19 from the date of service of a copy of [the R&R] within which to file specific written 20 objections to the Court,” and that “[f]ailure to timely file objections to [the R&R] may 21 result in the acceptance of [the R&R] by the District Court without further review,” as 22 provided in United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). (Doc. 17 23 at 5.) It has been 34 days since entry of the R&R and no party has filed any objection. The 24 District Court is thus free to accept the R&R and its analysis without further review. It 25 nonetheless reviews the issues raised in the Petition and Response thereto on their merits. 26 Upon doing so, it concludes, for the reasons set forth in the R&R, that Judge Willett is 27 correct that the Petition is quite premature, and it will dismiss without prejudice. 28 1 IT IS ORDERED adopting in whole the R&R entered by Judge Willett (Doc. 17), || including its reasoning. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing without prejudice the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment || accordingly and close this matter. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying a certificate of appealability, upon the 8 || Court’s finding that the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar, and 9|| that reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable. 10 Dated this 29th day of December, 2025. CN 11 “wok: 12 wef holee— Unifga State#District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

9 Koreasa Maria Williams, No. CV-25-02534-PHX-JJT

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 Unknown Gunther, et al.,

13 Respondents. 14 15 At issue is the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17, “R&R”) entered by United 16 States Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett recommending that the Court dismiss without 17 prejudice the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1, 18 “Petition”). In the R&R, Judge Willett advised the parties they “shall have fourteen days 19 from the date of service of a copy of [the R&R] within which to file specific written 20 objections to the Court,” and that “[f]ailure to timely file objections to [the R&R] may 21 result in the acceptance of [the R&R] by the District Court without further review,” as 22 provided in United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). (Doc. 17 23 at 5.) It has been 34 days since entry of the R&R and no party has filed any objection. The 24 District Court is thus free to accept the R&R and its analysis without further review. It 25 nonetheless reviews the issues raised in the Petition and Response thereto on their merits. 26 Upon doing so, it concludes, for the reasons set forth in the R&R, that Judge Willett is 27 correct that the Petition is quite premature, and it will dismiss without prejudice. 28 1 IT IS ORDERED adopting in whole the R&R entered by Judge Willett (Doc. 17), || including its reasoning. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing without prejudice the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment || accordingly and close this matter. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying a certificate of appealability, upon the 8 || Court’s finding that the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar, and 9|| that reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable. 10 Dated this 29th day of December, 2025. CN 11 “wok: 12 wef holee— Unifga State#District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Koreasa Maria Williams v. Unknown Gunther, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koreasa-maria-williams-v-unknown-gunther-et-al-azd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack