ORDER

R. STAN BAKER, District Judge.

The Court has conducted an independent and de novo review of the entire record and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, (doc. 14). Petitioner James Humphrey ("Humphrey") filed Objections to this Report and Recommendation, (doc. 15).

The Magistrate Judge recommended the Court grant Respondents' Motion to Dismiss and dismiss Humphrey's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition as being an unauthorized second or successive petition. (Doc. 14.) Humphrey already filed a §2254 petition in this Court, which was found to be untimely, and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has not given Humphrey permission to file another petition with this Court. (Id. at pp. 3-5.) Thus, this Court cannot review the underlying merits of his Petition. (Id.) Humphrey's citation to Estes v. Chapman, 382 F.3d 1237 (11th Cir. 2004), is misplaced for two reasons. First, Estes concerns the tolling of the applicable statute of limitations period in federal court based on a "properly filed" state court motion, not whether a § 2254 petition is an unauthorized second or successive petition. 382 F.3d at 1238-41. Second, even if it were applicable to Humphrey's current § 2254 Petition, Estes has been overruled. Jones v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., 906 F.3d 1339, 1351 (11th Cir. 2018) (recognizing Estes's overruling).

Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court. The Court GRANTS Respondents' Motion to Dismiss, DISMISSES Humphrey's § 2254 Petition, DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to CLOSE this case and enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal, and DENIES Humphrey in forma pauperis status on appeal and a Certificate of Appealability.

SO ORDERED.