2:25-cv-01471•Junker v. Bondi et al
Full text
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Joshua Junker, Petitioner, v. Pamela Bondi, et al., Respondents. No. CV-25-01471-PHX-DLR (DMF) ORDER Before the Court is Petitioner Joshua Junker’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 2) and United States Magistrate Judge Deborah M. Fine’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 17). The R&R recommends that the Court deny and dismiss the petition without prejudice. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Neither party filed objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will accept the R&R in its entirety. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole Case 2:25-cv-01471-DLR Document 18 Filed 03/19/26 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). IT IS ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 17) is ACCEPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner’s petition (Doc. 2) is DENIED and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment accordingly and terminate this case. Dated this 18th day of March, 2026. Douglas L. Rayes Senior United States District Judge Case 2:25-cv-01471-DLR Document 18 Filed 03/19/26 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.