Opinion
No. LA CV 19-00504-VBF-KS
11-25-2019
DAVID VELASQUEZ, Plaintiff, v. RAYMOND MADDEN (Warden), Respondent.
ORDER
Adopting Report & Recommendation: Denying the Habeas Petition;
Dismissing the Action With Prejudice;
Directing Entry of Separate Judgment;
Terminating the Case (JS-6)
Proceeding pro se, California state prisoner David Velasquez filed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § on January 23, 2019, CM/ECF Document ("Doc") 1, and respondent filed an Answer Memorandum and exhibits on June 11, 2019 (Doc 16). The Honorable Karen L. Stevenson, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a June 25, 2019 Order (Doc 25) reminding petitioner that the deadline for his optional traverse was July 31, 2019, but he did not file a traverse.
The Magistrate issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") on September 25, 2019 (Doc 27), advising that the Court deny the habeas petition for lack of merit. The Notice of Filing (Doc 26) advised the parties that they had to file any objections to the R&R no later than October 16, 2019. Petitioner has not objected within the time allotted by C.D. Cal. Local Civil Rule 72-3.4, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) requires de novo review only of those parts of an R&R to which a party has timely objected. See Khan v. Langford, 2018 WL 1271204, *1 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2018) (citing, inter alia, US v. Reyna Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9 Cir. 2003) (en banc)).
But the Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) recommend that when no timely objection is filed, the Court should review the R&R "for clear error on the face of the record." Juarez, 2016 WL 2908238 at *2 (cite omitted); accord Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5 Cir. 1996) (en banc); Benitez v. Parmer, 654 F. App'x 502, 503 (2d Cir. 2016) ("Because Benitez thus made only a general objection, the district court reviewed the 2013 R&R for clear error.") (citing, inter alia, Adv. Comm. Notes to 1983 Am. of Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)).
On de novo or clear-error review, the Court finds no defect of law, fact, or logic in the R&R. Accordingly, the Court will accept the Magistrate Judge's findings and conclusions and implement her recommendations.
ORDER
The Report and Recommendation [Doc # 27] is ADOPTED.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus [Doc # 1] is DENIED.
This action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
As required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a), judgment will be a separate document.
The Court will also rule on a certificate of appealability by separate order.
The case SHALL BE TERMINATED and closed (JS-6).
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 25, 2019
/s/_________
Honorable Valerie Baker Fairbank
Senior United States District Judge