Mehmeti v. Warden FCI Elkton, 4:14-cv-00547

Petitioner Faik Mehmeti filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his confinement; the Magistrate Judge issued a Report & Recommendation (R&R) on May 19, 2016 recommending denial.
The R&R was mailed to Petitioner at the Bureau of Prisons address; the first mailing was returned and a second mailing (including inmate number) was sent and not returned.
Petitioner did not file any written objections to the R&R within the 14-day period provided by Rule 72(b).
The Magistrate Judge’s R&R therefore stands unobjected to, which the district court treated as a waiver of objections.
The district court conducted the required review, adopted the R&R in full, and denied the habeas petition.
The court also sua sponte determined that a certificate of appealability should not issue because an appeal could not be taken in good faith.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether petitioner’s failure to object waives de novo review	Mehmeti implicitly argued merits in his petition (no objections filed)	Respondents argued R&R should be adopted because no objections were filed	Court held failure to object waives issues; adopted R&R and denied petition
Proper service and notice of the R&R	Mehmeti did not contest service; no objection filed after mailings	Respondents showed R&R mailed twice to BOP address including inmate number	Court found service adequate and no subsequent objection filed
Whether to issue a certificate of appealability	Mehmeti would seek appellate review (implied)	Respondents argued no good-faith basis for appeal	Court held no certificate of appealability should issue; appeal not taken in good faith
Standard of review for magistrate recommendations	Mehmeti entitled to the 14-day objection period under Rule 72(b)	Respondents relied on Rule 72 and relevant precedent to support adoption	Court applied Rule 72(b) and precedent and adopted the R&R

United States v. Campbell, 261 F.3d 628 (6th Cir. 2001) (discusses standards for objections to magistrate recommendations)
Norman v. Astrue, 694 F. Supp. 2d 738 (N.D. Ohio 2010) (district court review of magistrate judge recommendations)
Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984) (failure to object to magistrate report may waive issues)
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (affirming waiver rule on failure to object)
United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981) (procedural principles on objections to magistrate reports)