McClendon v. Healy

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
DOUGLAS MCCLENDON, 	CASE NO. 4:25 CV 1082
Petitioner,
v. 	JUDGE JAMES R. KNEPP II
WARDEN IAN M. HEALY,
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND
Respondent. 	ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Jennifer Dowdell Armstrong’s Report
and Recommendation (“R&R”) to grant Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss Petitioner Douglas
McClendon’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 10).
Specifically, Judge Armstrong recommends the Petition be dismissed because Petitioner is no
longer in federal custody, the issue raised is now moot, and the Court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction. See id.
Under the relevant statute:
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy [of a Magistrate Judge’s R&R],
any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and
recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a
de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings
or recommendations to which objection is made.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2). The failure to file timely written
objections to a Magistrate Judge’s R&R constitutes a waiver of de novo review by the district court
of any issues covered in the R&R. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813, 814-15 (6th Cir. 1984); United
States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case: 4:25-cv-01082-JRK Doc #: 11 Filed: 02/10/26 1 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>

2
In this case, the R&R was issued on January 9, 2026, and it is now February 10, 2026.
Petitioner has neither filed objections nor requested an extension of time to file them. Despite the
lack of objections, the Court has reviewed Judge Armstrong’s R&R, and agrees with the findings
and recommended rulings therein. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS Judge Armstrong’s R&R (Doc.
10) as the Order of this Court, GRANTS Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) and
DISMISSES Petitioner’s Petition (Doc. 1) as set forth therein. The Court further CERTIFIES that
an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ James R. Knepp II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: February 10, 2026
Case: 4:25-cv-01082-JRK Doc #: 11 Filed: 02/10/26 2 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>