Opinion
No. LA CV 17-03216-VBF-AFM
05-22-2018
RHONDA MAYE WISTO, Petitioner, v. DERRAL ADAMS (WARDEN), Respondent.
ORDER
Adopting the Report & Recommendation; Denying the Habeas Corpus Petition; Dismissing the Action With Prejudice; Terminating and Closing Action (JS-6)
This is a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas action. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in February 2018. This Court has reviewed the petition, answer, lodged documents, traverse, R&R, and applicable law. Petitioner has not objected within the time allotted by Local Rule 72-3 and the Notice of Filing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) requires de novo review only of those parts of an R&R to which a party has filed timely specific objection, US v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). 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." Id. On clear-error or de novo review, the Court finds no defect of law, fact, or logic in the R&R.
The Report and Recommendation [Doc # 19] is ADOPTED.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus [Doc #1] is DENIED.
As required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a), the Court will enter judgment separately.
The action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The case shall be TERMINATED (JS-6).
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 22, 2018
/s/_________
Hon. Valerie Baker Fairbank
Senior United States District Judge