August 16, 2013
United States of America, Plaintiff/Respondent,
Juan Fernandez-Mendoza, Defendant/Petitioner/Movant.
JAMES A. TEILBORG, Senior District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 11) recommending that the Motion be denied.
Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not required to conduct "any review at all... of any issue that is not the subject of an objection" (emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ( en banc ) ("statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise" (emphasis in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003).
IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1) is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE; and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings, in the event Movant files an appeal, a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied because Movant has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.