1
2
3
4
5
6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
Adam M cCormack, ) No. CV-25-08027-PCT-SPL
)
9
)
10 Petitioner, ) ORDER
vs. )
)
11
)
Ryan Thornell, et al., )
12
)
13 Respondents. )
)
14 )
15 Petitioner Adam McCormack has filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas
16 Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 7). The Honorable Michael T. Morrissey,
17 United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 13),
18 recommending that the Court deny the Petition. Judge Morrissey advised the parties that
19 they had fourteen (14) days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely
20 objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Doc. 13
21 at 8) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia,
22 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)).
23 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to
24 review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
25 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is
26 not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must
27 determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly
28 objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken.
The Court will adopt the R&R and deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating
2| that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
3 | recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge
4) may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or
return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). Accordingly,
6 IT IS ORDERED:
7 1. That Magistrate Judge Michael T. Morrissey’s Report and Recommendation
8 | (Doc. 13) is accepted and adopted by the Court;
9 2. That the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 (Doc. 7; see also Doc. 2) is denied and dismissed with prejudice;
11 3. That a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal are denied; and
13 4. That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.
14 Dated this 15th day of December, 2025.
15
16
7 EL ES
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.