Archaga-Reyes v. Warner

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 7 AT SEATTLE CHRISTIAN ARCHAGA-REYES, 9 Petitioner, Case No. C24-231-JHC 10 v. ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL JACK WARNER, HABEAS ACTION 12 Respondent.

14 The Court, having reviewed de novo Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge S. Kate Vaughan, Petitioner’s objections thereto, and the remaining record, hereby finds and ORDERS: 17 (1) The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s objections. See Dkt. # 29. To the extent Petitioner raises new evidence or arguments not raised before Judge Vaughan—e.g., regarding equitable tolling—the Court exercises its discretion not to consider them. See United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Song Ja Cha, 597 F.3d 995, 1003 n.7 (9th Cir. 2010). The Court notes that Respondent previously raised the issue of equitable tolling, Dkt. # 21 at 10, and Petitioner did not address it despite having the opportunity to do so, Dkt. # ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL HABEAS ACTION - 1 || 27. The Court also notes that Petitioner makes factual assertions—e.g., regarding his medical || condition—unsupported by the record. He does not otherwise provide a basis to reject the || Report and Recommendation.

4 (2) Thus, the Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted.

5 (3) Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus (Dkt. #5) and this action are || DISMISSED, with prejudice, as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).

7 (4) In accordance with Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the || United States District Courts, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

9 (5) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Petitioner, to counsel for || Respondent, and to the Honorable S. Kate Vaughan.

11 DATED this 16th day of September, 2025.

13 Cok. 4. Chan _ JOHN H. CHUN 14 United States District Judge ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL HABEAS ACTION - 2