1

2

3

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 Case No. 8: 21-cv-00443-SSS-SK 7 ERICK SILVA-SUAREZ,

8 Petitioner, 9 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT v. AND RECOMMENDATION TO 10 DENY HABEAS PETITION 11 KELLY SANTORO,

12 Respondent. 13

14 15 In accordance with

, the Court has reviewed the attached 16 Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) to deny the habeas petition, any 17 pertinent records as needed, and Petitioner’s objections. [Dkt. 18]. The Court 18 has reviewed de novo those identifiable portions of the R&R to which Petitioner 19 has timely and properly objected. See

(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 20 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en 21 banc). 22 In doing so, the Court declines to consider any arguments raised for the 23 first time only in the objections. See United States v. Howell,

, 24 621–23 (9th Cir. 2000). It also declines to consider objections that simply 25 repeat arguments fully addressed but rejected in the R&R. See Trejo Perez v. 26 Madden,

, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2020) (objections that 27 “merely repeat[] the same arguments . . . considered and found to be 1] magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations”); Hagberg v. Astrue, 2009 2] WL 3386595, at *1 (D. Mont. Oct. 14, 2009) (“Objections to a magistrate’s 3 || Findings and Recommendations are not a vehicle for the losing party to 4] relitigate its case.”). 5 Concluding that nothing in Petitioner’s objections affects the material 6 || findings and conclusions in the R&R, the Court accepts the R&R and orders that || the petition under

be DENIED. Judgment DISMISSING this 8 || action WITH PREJUDICE will be entered accordingly. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 11 || DATED: June 26, 2023 2 SUNSHINE S¢ YKES United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28