ORDER

JENNIFER G. ZIPPS, District Judge.

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Bernardo P. Velasco that recommends denying Petitioner's habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. (Doc. 15.) As thoroughly explained by Magistrate Judge Velasco, Petitioner is not entitled to relief as his petition is untimely. As Petitioner's objections do not undermine the analysis and proper conclusion reached by Magistrate Judge Velasco, Petitioner's objections are rejected and the Report and Recommendation is adopted.

Before Petitioner can appeal this Court's judgment, a certificate of appealability must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) and Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b) requires the district court that rendered a judgment denying the petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 to "either issue a certificate of appealability or state why a certificate should not issue." Additionally, 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2) provides that a certificate may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." In the certificate, the court must indicate which specific issues satisfy this showing. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(3). A substantial showing is made when the resolution of an issue of appeal is debatable among reasonable jurists, if courts could resolve the issues differently, or if the issue deserves further proceedings. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Upon review of the record in light of the standards for granting a certificate of appealability, the Court concludes that a certificate shall not issue as the resolution of the petition is not debatable among reasonable jurists and does not deserve further proceedings.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: