Opinion
Case No. LA CV 17-07071-VBF-PLA
06-06-2018
DANIEL PACHECO, Petitioner, v. RAYMOND MADDEN (Warden), Respondent.
ORDER
Overruling Petitioner's Objections and Adopting the Report & Recommendation; Dismissing the Action With Prejudice; Terminating the Case (JS-6)
This an action for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. "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 . . . R&R." Rael v. Foulk, 2015 WL 4111295, *1 (C.D. Cal. July 7, 2015), COA denied, No. 15-56205 (9th Cir. Feb. 18, 2016). "The Magistrates Act does not require the district judge to provide a written explanation of the reasons for rejecting objections. See MacKenzie v. Calif. AG, 2016 WL 5339566, *1 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2016) (quoting US v. Bayer AG, 639 F. App'x 164, 168-69 (4th Cir. 2016)). "This is particularly true where, as here, the objections are plainly unavailing." Smith v. Calif. Jud. Council, 2016 WL 6069179, *2 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2016). Accordingly, the Court will accept the Magistrate Judge's factual findings and legal conclusions and implement his recommendations.
ORDER
Petitioner's objection [Doc # 20] is OVERRULED.
The Report and Recommendation [Doc # 19] is ADOPTED.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus [Doc # 1] is DENIED.
Final judgment consistent with this order will be entered separately as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a). See Jayne v. Sherman, 706 F.3d 994, 1009 (9th Cir. 2013).
This action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
The case SHALL BE TERMINATED and closed (JS-6). Dated: June 6, 2018
/s/_________
Hon. Valerie Baker Fairbank
Senior United States District Judge