Filed: May 03, 2016
Latest Update: May 03, 2016
Summary: ORDER Overruling Petitioner's Objections; Adopting the Report and Recommendation; Denying the Habeas Corpus Petition; Directing Entry of Separate Final Judgment; Dismissing the Action With Prejudice; Terminating and Closing the Case (JS-6) VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK , Senior District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2254 ("petition") (CM/ECF Document ("Doc") 1
Summary: ORDER Overruling Petitioner's Objections; Adopting the Report and Recommendation; Denying the Habeas Corpus Petition; Directing Entry of Separate Final Judgment; Dismissing the Action With Prejudice; Terminating and Closing the Case (JS-6) VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK , Senior District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2254 ("petition") (CM/ECF Document ("Doc") 1)..
More
ORDER
Overruling Petitioner's Objections; Adopting the Report and Recommendation;
Denying the Habeas Corpus Petition;
Directing Entry of Separate Final Judgment;
Dismissing the Action With Prejudice; Terminating and Closing the Case (JS-6)
VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK, Senior District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2254 ("petition") (CM/ECF Document ("Doc") 1), the respondent warden's answer and accompanying memorandum (Doc 24), the relevant decision(s) of the California state courts, the state-court "lodged documents" submitted by the respondent in paper form (listed in the "Notice of Lodging" index at Doc 25), petitioner's traverse (Doc 32), the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") issued by the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) on November 16, 2015 (Doc 37), petitioner's timely1 objections to the R&R (Doc 43), and the applicable law.
"Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) gave respondent a right to respond to the objections, but the time to do so has elapsed and respondent has filed neither a response nor a request for an extension of time. Accordingly, the Court proceeds to the merits without waiting further." Ruelas v. Muniz, No. SA CV 14-01761, 2016 WL 540769, *1 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2016) (Fairbank, J.).
"As required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), the Court has engaged in de novo review of the portions of the R&R to which petitioner has specifically objected and finds no defect of law, fact, or logic in the Magistrate Judge's R&R." Rael v. Foulk, No. LA CV 14-02987, 2015 WL 4111295, *1 (C.D. Cal. July 7, 2015) (Fairbank, J.), appeal filed, No. 15-56205 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2015).
ORDER
Petitioner's objections to the Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED.
The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.
The Court will rule on a certificate of appealability by separate order.
Final judgment in favor of respondent shall be entered consistent with this Order.
As required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a), that judgment shall be a separate document.
The Clerk of Court SHALL TERMINATE AND CLOSE this case.
