IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MICHAEL NEMECEK, No. 3:17-cv-00340-YY

Petitioner, ORDER

v.

TIM CAUSEY,

Respondent.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge You issued a Findings and Recommendation on December 21, 2020, in which she recommends that this Court deny Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. F&R, ECF 78. 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 and Recommendation. Pet. Obj., ECF 80. 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 You Findings and Recommendation [78]. Therefore, Petitioner’s Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus [42] pursuant to

is DENIED. Because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a Certificate of Appealability pursuant to

(c)(1)(A) is also DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___F_e_b_r_u_a_r_y_ 2__3_, _2_0_2_2_____.

___________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge