IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

JAGGER BOWEN, No. 2:18-cv-01605-SB

Petitioner, ORDER

v.

JERI TAYLOR,

Respondent.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Beckerman issued a Findings and Recommendation on May 27, 2020, in which she recommends that this Court deny Petitioner’s Amended Petition and dismiss this proceeding with prejudice. F&R, ECF 27. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Petitioner filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 29. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge’s report.

(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall,

(9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Court has carefully considered Petitioner’s objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent

portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Beckerman’s Findings and Recommendation [27]. Therefore, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s Amended Petition [20], and this case is dismissed with prejudice. A certificate of appealability is DENIED because Defendant has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See

(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: __D__e_c_e_m__b_e_r_ 1_3__, _2_0_2_0____.

___________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge