Mejia v. Hudson

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5

9 Ernesto Manuel Mejia, No. CV-24-00306-TUC-JCH

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 Unknown Hudson,

13 Respondent. 14 15 Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau's Report and 16 Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 11). Judge Rateau recommends denying Petitioner's 17 Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal 18 Custody (the "Petition"). See id. at 12. No objections to the R&R were filed. See generally 19 Docket. 20 A district court reviews objected-to portions of an R&R de novo. 28 U.S.C. 21 § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 22 (9th Cir. 1989). Failure to timely object may be considered a waiver of a party's right to de 23 novo consideration of the issues. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121–22 24 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The advisory committee's notes to Rule 72(b) of the Federal 25 Rules of Civil Procedure state that, "[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the court need only 26 satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the 27 recommendation" of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note to 28 1983 addition; see also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). 1 After independent review, the Court is satisfied that Judge Rateau's 2 || recommendation is sound. The Court will adopt the R&R in full. 3 Accordingly, 4 IT IS ORDERED adopting in full the R&R (Doc. 11). 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Petition (Doc. 1). The Clerk of the 6 || Court shall enter judgment and close this case. 7 Dated this 10th day of December, 2024. 8 9 f 4) 10 a HA ll / / John C. Hinderaker _/United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-