From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rouser v. Soto

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 29, 2016
Case No. LA CV 15-2123 DSF (JCG) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)

Opinion

Case No. LA CV 15-2123 DSF (JCG)

03-29-2016

WILLIAM ROUSER, Petitioner, v. J. SOTO, 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's Objections reiterate arguments made in the Petition and Reply, and lack merit for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted;

2. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is granted;

3. Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice; and

4. The Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.

Additionally, for the reasons stated 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: March 29, 2016

/s/_________

HON. DALE S. FISCHER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Rouser v. Soto

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 29, 2016
Case No. LA CV 15-2123 DSF (JCG) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)
Case details for

Rouser v. Soto

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM ROUSER, Petitioner, v. J. SOTO, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 29, 2016

Citations

Case No. LA CV 15-2123 DSF (JCG) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)