Opinion
Case No. CV 15-9614-ODW (JPR)
03-23-2017
JONATHAN HIGGINS, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM L. MUNIZ, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge. On March 6, 2017, Petitioner filed objections to the R. & R., in which he mostly simply repeats in conclusory fashion some of the arguments in his Petition. His arguments were thoroughly addressed and rejected in the R. & R.
Having made a de novo determination of those portions of the R. & R. to which Petitioner has filed objections, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Respondent's motion to dismiss is denied as moot, the Petition is summarily denied as time barred, and Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. DATED: March 23, 2017
Petitioner's objections also purport to be a notice of appeal. But because judgment had not yet been entered at that time, the notice is ineffective to appeal from the Court's decision. See Burnside v. Jacquez, 731 F.3d 874, 875 (9th Cir. 2013) ("A notice of appeal from a magistrate judge's report and recommendation is ineffective."). Petitioner must file a new notice of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1). --------
/s/_________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE