SABINO v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CV 13-3529 JGB (JCG). (2014)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20140825626
Visitors: 16
Filed: Aug. 22, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 22, 2014
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY JESUS G. BERNAL, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted; 2. Judg
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY JESUS G. BERNAL, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted; 2. Judgm..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
JESUS G. BERNAL, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted;
2. Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action without prejudice; and
3. The Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.
Additionally, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). Thus, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
Source: Leagle
