1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEFFERY LEE MOURNING, Case No.: 3:20-cv-00786-WQH-NLS

12 ORDER Petitioner, 13 v. 14 NEIL MCDOWELL, Warden, et. 15 al., 16 17 Respondents. 18 HAYES, Judge: 19 The matter before the Court is the Report and Recommendation issued by the 20 Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 20). 21 The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation of a 22 magistrate judge are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and

636(b). The district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the 24 report . . . to which objection is made” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 25 part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b). 26 The district court need not review de novo those portions of a Report and Recommendation 27 to which neither party objects. See Wang v. Masaitis,

, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 28 2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (“Neither the 1 || Constitution nor the [Federal Magistrates Act] requires a district judge to review, de novo, 2 || findings and recommendations that the parties themselves accept as correct.”’). 3 The record reflects that no objections have been filed by either party. The Court has 4 ||reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the record, and the submissions of the parties. 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 20) is 6 |} ADOPTED in its entirety. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of 7 || Habeas Corpus pursuant to

filed by Petitioner Jeffery Lee Mourning 8 ||(ECF No. 1) is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of 9 || Respondents and against Petitioner. 10 || Dated: December 21, 2020 BME: ie Z. A a 1] Hon. William Q. Hayes 2 United States District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28