Fausto Moreno v. Pollard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FAUSTO MORENO, ) N O . C V 2 0 - 7 7 0 5 - S B ( K S ) Petitioner, ) v. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND ) ) RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED

WARDEN POLLARD, ) STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Respondent. ) _________________________________ )

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”), all of the records herein, and the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”). The time for filing Objections to the Report has passed, and no Objections have been filed with the Court. The Court has also reviewed Petitioner’s request for voluntary dismissal without prejudice (Dkt. No. 13), which he filed during the period for—and in lieu of—Objections, and Respondent’s opposition to that request (Dkt. No. 15). Respondent’s position that it would suffer prejudice if Petitioner was allowed to avoid a dismissal with prejudice at this late stage—after a Report recommending dismissal with prejudice has been issued—is persuasive. See In re Sizzler Restaurants Int’l Inc., 262 B.R. 811, (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2001) (citing Phillips USA Inc. v. Allflex USA Inc., 77 F.3d 354, 358 (10th Cir. 1996)); Maxum Indem. Ins. Co. v. A-1 All Am. Roofing Co., 299 F. App’x 664, 666 } (9th Cir. 2008) (unpublished). Accordingly, Petitioner’s request for a dismissal without prejudice is DENIED.

Therefore, having completed its review of briefing and the Report, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) the Petition is DENIED; and (2) Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.

DATED: March 5, 2021 (ress. i ~ STANLEY BLUMENFELD, □□□ D UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE