Singh v. Noem et al

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
Gurinderdeep Singh,
Petitioner,
v.
Kristi Noem, et al.,
Respondents.
No. CV-26-01686-PHX-DWL
ORDER
Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) and the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of
the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 12). The R&R, which was issued on April 23,
2026, recommends that “the Petition (Doc. 1) be granted to the extent that Petitioner be
provided a bond redetermination hearing.” (Doc. 12 at 8.) The R&R further provides that
“[t]he parties shall have fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of this
recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court.” (Id.)
Here, no such objections have been filed and the 14-day deadline has expired. Thus,
the Court adopts the R&R in significant part. See, e.g., Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-
50 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a
magistrate’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when
neither party objects to those findings.”); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226
(D. Ariz. 2003) (“[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation unless objections are filed.”). See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328
Case 2:26-cv-01686-DWL Document 13 Filed 05/12/26 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
F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s
findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.”). The only
modest change is that the Court will order that the bond hearing occur within 7 days of the
issuance of this order, rather than the longer period contemplated in the R&R, to align with
how the Court has resolved similar cases in recent months.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The R&R’s recommended disposition (Doc. 12) is accepted in part.
2. The Petition (Doc. 1) is granted to the extent that Petitioner be provided a
bond redetermination hearing.
3. Respondents shall provide Petitioner a bond redetermination hearing within
7 days of the entry of judgment; absent a timely bond redetermination hearing,
Respondents shall release Petitioner from ICE custody under the same conditions that
existed before Petitioner’s present immigration detention.
4. Respondents shall file a notice of compliance within three (3) days of
providing Petitioner a bond redetermination hearing or releasing Petitioner.
5. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action.
Dated this 12th day of May, 2026.
Case 2:26-cv-01686-DWL Document 13 Filed 05/12/26 Page 2 of 2