Storey v. Paramo

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DONTAZE A. STOREY, Case No.: 17cv23-LAB (BGS) 12 Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND v. RECOMMENDATION; AND DANIEL PARAMO, ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR 15 Respondent. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 17 Petitioner Dontaze Storey, a prisoner in state custody, filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Bernard Skomal who, on March 22, 2019, issued his report and recommendation (the “R&R”). Judge Skomal’s R&R set forth a thorough account of the procedural history and analysis Storey’s claims, and recommended denying the petition.

22 The Court granted three separate extensions of time for Storey to file his objections to the R&R, most recently extending the deadline to August 12, 2019. Still, he has filed no objections.

25 A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). “The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to.” Id. “A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, 1 findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

2 || This section does not require some lesser review by the district court when no objections || are filed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). The “statute makes it clear that the || district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if || objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 || (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original).

7 The Court has reviewed the R&R, finds it to be correct, and ADOPTS it. The || Petition is DENIED.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 ||Dated: August 26, 2019 / A B WY 12 Hon. Larry Alan Burns 13 United States District Judge