JODY-ANNY CAMPBELL v. JESSICA KEITH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: : : JODY-ANN CAMPBELL : No. 2:24-cv-5288 : : ____________________________________ O R D E R AND NOW, this 7th day of April, 2025, upon consideration of the pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 1; Petitioner’s Letter in support thereof, ECF Nos. 5, 7; the amended Habeas Corpus Petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 , ECF No. 8; the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Lynne A. Sitarski on February 12, 2025, ECF No. 13; and in the absence of objections;1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 13, is APPROVED and ADOPTED. 2. The petitions for writ of habeas corpus, ECF Nos. 1 and 8, are DISMISSED. 1 When neither party objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court is not statutorily required to review the report, under de novo or any other standard. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 152 (1985). Nevertheless, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has held that it is better practice to afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987), writ denied 484 U.S. 837 (1987). “When no objections are filed, the district court need only review the record for plain error or manifest injustice.” Harper v. Sullivan, No. 89-4272, 1991 WL 24908 , at *1 n.3 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 25, 1991). See also Hill v. Barnacle, 655 F. App'x 142, 148 (3d Cir. 2016) (holding that even when objections are filed, district courts “are not required to make any separate findings or conclusions when reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation de novo under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)”); Oldrati v. Apfel, 33 F. Supp. 2d 397, 399 (E.D. Pa. 1998) (explaining that in the absence of a timely objection, the court should review the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation for clear error). The district court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C). 3. There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability. 4. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. BY THE COURT: /s/ Joseph F. Leeson, Jr._________ JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR. United States District Judge