White v. Gutierrez

Opinion

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

9 Christopher G White, No. CV-23-00180-TUC-JCH

10 Petitioner, ORDER

11 v.

12 M. Gutierrez,

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

_2-