Opinion
Case No. LA CV 15-3228 JAK (JCG)
07-02-2015
JAMES HAROLD RICHARDSON, Petitioner, v. JOHN McMAHANN, Respondent.
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination.
Petitioner objects in conclusory fashion, but does not meaningfully challenge the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that the Petition is untimely.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted;
2. Judgment is entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice; and
Accordingly, Petitioner's request for leave to amend the Petition, [Dkt. No. 6 at 2-3], is DENIED AS MOOT. --------
3. The Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.
Additionally, for the reasons set forth above and in the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). Thus, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. DATED: 7/2/15
/s/_________
HON. JOHN A. KRONSTADT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE