From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gregg v. Gower

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 28, 2006
No. CV 04-265-MO (D. Or. Mar. 28, 2006)

Opinion

No. CV 04-265-MO.

March 28, 2006


OPINION AND ORDER


On February 14, 2006, Magistrate Judge Ashmanskas issued Findings and Recommendation ("FR") (#47) in the above-captioned case recommending petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition (#1) be denied. No objections were filed.

The magistrate judge only makes recommendations to the district court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. Where objections have been made, I conduct a de novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, I am not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the FR to which no objections are made. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

Upon review, I agree with Judge Ashmanskas' recommendation to DENY the petition, and I ADOPT the FR as my own opinion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gregg v. Gower

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 28, 2006
No. CV 04-265-MO (D. Or. Mar. 28, 2006)
Case details for

Gregg v. Gower

Case Details

Full title:John Thomas Gregg, Petitioner, v. Michael Gower, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Mar 28, 2006

Citations

No. CV 04-265-MO (D. Or. Mar. 28, 2006)