1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WENDELL RAY THOMAS, Case No. CV 20-2982-DSF (PD)

12 Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING 13 v. AMENDED REPORT AND 14 ADOPTING, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 15 LAURA ELDRIGE, RECOMMENDATIONS OF 16 Respondent. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND 17 DENYING CERTIFICATE OF 18 APPEALABILITY

19 20 Pursuant to

, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the 21 records on file, the Amended Report and Recommendation of United States 22 Magistrate Judge (“Amended Report”), and Petitioner’s Objections to that 23 Amended Report. The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those 24 portions of the Amended Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Court 25 accepts the Amended Report and adopts it as its own findings and 26 conclusions. Accordingly, the Petition is dismissed with prejudice. 27 Further, for the reasons stated in the Amended Report and 28 1 | showing of the denial of a constitutional right and, therefore, a certificate of 2 || appealability is denied. See

(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); 3 || Miller-El v. Cockrell,

(2003). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. > || DATED: May 10, 2021 | 3 ~

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28