Filed: Jan. 30, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2012
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge. On December 23, 2010, Magistrate Judge Davison entered a Report & Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that this Court dismiss Petitioner's habeas corpus Petition. (R&R 30 (Dkt. No. 22).) In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Davison provides notice that objections to his conclusions were due within seventeen days, and that failure to object would constitute a waiver of Petitioner's right to appeal. ( Id. ) No objections have bee
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge. On December 23, 2010, Magistrate Judge Davison entered a Report & Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that this Court dismiss Petitioner's habeas corpus Petition. (R&R 30 (Dkt. No. 22).) In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Davison provides notice that objections to his conclusions were due within seventeen days, and that failure to object would constitute a waiver of Petitioner's right to appeal. ( Id. ) No objections have been..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge.
On December 23, 2010, Magistrate Judge Davison entered a Report & Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that this Court dismiss Petitioner's habeas corpus Petition. (R&R 30 (Dkt. No. 22).) In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Davison provides notice that objections to his conclusions were due within seventeen days, and that failure to object would constitute a waiver of Petitioner's right to appeal. (Id.) No objections have been filed.
When no objections are filed, the Court reviews an R&R on a dispositive motion for clear error. See Eisenberg v. New England Motor Freight, Inc., 564 F.Supp.2d 224, 226 (S.D.N.Y. 2008). The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise.1 The Court therefore adopts the R&R in its entirety, and it is hereby
ORDERED that the Petition is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to close this case.
Because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lucidore v. N.Y. State Div. of Parole, 209 F.3d 107, 111-12 (2d Cir. 2000). In addition, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962).
