Storey v. Paramo

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 DONTAZE A. STOREY, Case No.: 17cv23-LAB (BGS)

12 Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 13 v. RECOMMENDATION; AND

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR 15 Respondent. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 16 17 Petitioner Dontaze Storey, a prisoner in state custody, filed his petition for writ of 18 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge 19 Bernard Skomal who, on March 22, 2019, issued his report and recommendation (the 20 “R&R”). Judge Skomal’s R&R set forth a thorough account of the procedural history and 21 analysis Storey’s claims, and recommended denying the petition. 22 The Court granted three separate extensions of time for Storey to file his objections 23 to the R&R, most recently extending the deadline to August 12, 2019. Still, he has filed 24 no objections. 25 A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and 26 recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). “The district judge must 27 determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly 28 objected to.” Id. “A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, 1 findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 2 || This section does not require some lesser review by the district court when no objections 3 || are filed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). The “statute makes it clear that the 4 || district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if 5 || objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 6 || (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original). 7 The Court has reviewed the R&R, finds it to be correct, and ADOPTS it. The 8 || Petition is DENIED. 9 11 ||Dated: August 26, 2019 / A B WY 12 Hon. Larry Alan Burns 13 United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28