Singh v. Wolf

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: January 12, 2021
• Docket: 2:20-cv-01169
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8

Hardee p Singh, ) No. CV-20-01169-PHX-SPL ) 9 ) 10 Petitioner, ) ORDER vs. ) ) 11 ) Chad Wolf, et al., ) 12 ) 13 Respondents. ) ) 14 )

15 Petitioner Hardeep Singh has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 16 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). On July 20, 2020, Respondents filed a Motion to Dismiss (or 17 alternatively, to transfer) (Doc. 18). The Honorable James F. Metcalf, United States 18 Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 21), 19 recommending that the Court grant the Motion to Dismiss/Transfer and transfer the Petition 20 for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the United States District Court for the Southern District of 21 Mississippi. Judge Metcalf advised the parties that they had fourteen (14) days to file 22 objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a 23 waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Doc. 21 at 23) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; 24 United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). 25 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to 26 review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 27 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 28 not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 1 | determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 2| objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. 3 | The Court will adopt the R&R and grant the Motion to Transfer. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 5| findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The 6 | district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further 7 | evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). Accordingly, 8 IT IS ORDERED: 9 1. That Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf’s Report and Recommendation 10| (Doc. 21) is accepted and adopted by the Court; 11 2. That the Motion to Dismiss/Transfer (Doc. 18) is granted; 12 3. That the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 13 | (Doc. 1) shall be transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District 14| of Mississippi; and 15 4. That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 16 Dated this 11th day of January, 2021. 17

19 United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28