1

2

3

4 O

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 JUAN FRANCISCO SANDOVAL- Case No. 2:20-cv-00928-JVS-KES

12 LINARES, ORDER ACCEPTING FINAL REPORT 13 Petitioner, AND RECOMMENDATION OF U.S.

14 v. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15 MATTHEW T. ALBENCER, Field

16 Director, Immigration and Customs

17 Enforcement, et al.,

18 Respondents.

19

20

21 Pursuant to

, the Court has reviewed the Petition (Dkt. 1), the

22 other records on file herein, and the Final Report and Recommendation of the

23 United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 23). No objections to the Report and

24 Recommendation were filed, and the deadline for filing such objections has passed.

25 The Court accepts the report, findings, and recommendations of the Magistrate

26 Judge.

27 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents’ motion to dismiss (Dkt.

28 1 | 8) 1s granted and Judgment shall be entered dismissing the Petition for lack of 2 | subject matter jurisdiction. 3 As a federal prisoner proceeding under

, Petitioner is not 4 | required to obtain a certificate of appealability (“COA”) in order to appeal to the 5 | United States Court of Appeals in this case. See Harrison v. Ollison,

, 6 | 958 (9th Cir. 2008) (holding that the plain language of

(c)(1) does 7 | not require federal prisoners bringing § 2241 petitions to obtain a COA in order to 8 | appeal, unless the § 2241 petition “is merely a ‘disguised’ § 2255 petition”); see 9 | e.g., Tomlinson v. Caraway, No. 14-020094-VBF (KK),

, at *1 10 | (C.D. Cal. Sept. 16, 2014) (adopting report and recommendation and noting that 11 | petitioner in federal custody was not required to obtain a COA to appeal the denial 12 | of his § 2241 petition). 13

15 | DATED: December 14, 2020 1 qa VY /K-— 16 JAMES V. SELNA // 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

°| Prom Seat KAREN E. SCOTT 21 | UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28