Ndiaye v. Sullivan et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
MAMADOU NDIAYE, 	CASE NO. 3:26 CV 1938
Petitioner,
v. 	JUDGE JAMES R. KNEPP II
WARDEN DENNIS SULLIVAN, et al,
Respondents. 	ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay’s Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) to dismiss without prejudice Petitioner Mamadou Ndiaye’s Petition
for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 8).
Under the relevant statute:
Within fourteen days of 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).
In this case, the R&R was issued on September 16, 2026, and it is now October 14, 2026.
Petitioner has neither filed objections nor requested an extension of time to file them. Therefore,
the Court ADOPTS Judge Clay’s R&R (Doc. 8) as the Order of this Court, DISMISSES
Case: 3:26-cv-01938-JRK Doc #: 9 Filed: 10/15/26 1 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>

2
WITHOUT PREJUDICE Petitioner’s Petition (Doc. 1) as set forth therein. The Court further finds
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: October 15, 2026
Case: 3:26-cv-01938-JRK Doc #: 9 Filed: 10/15/26 2 of 2. PageID #: <pageID>