MEMORANDUM OPINION

MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA, District Judge.

With the assistance of counsel, Mr. Kennedy filed this habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 31, 2019, the magistrate judge entered a report in which she recommended that the Court deny Mr. Kennedy's habeas petition as time-barred. (Doc. 8). The magistrate also recommended against the issuance of a certificate of appealability. (Doc. 8). The magistrate judge informed the parties of their opportunity to object to her report within 14 days. No party has filed objections to the report.

A district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district court reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error factual findings to which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749 (11th Cir. 1988); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed. Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).

Having reviewed and considered Mr. Kennedy's petition (Doc. 1), his arguments concerning equitable estoppel (Doc. 7), and the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (Doc. 8), the Court agrees that Mr. Kennedy waited too long to file his federal habeas petition, and, under binding precedent, he has not established a basis for equitable tolling. The Court adopts the magistrate judge's factual findings and accepts her recommendations. The Court denies the petition for writ of habeas corpus as time-barred. By separate order, the Court will dismiss this matter with prejudice.

For the reasons set forth in the report and recommendation (Doc. 8, p. 9) and pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases, this Court will not issue a certificate of appealability. If he wishes to appeal, Mr. Kennedy may request a certificate from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

A separate order will be entered.

DONE and ORDERED.