Case Information
*1 Case 3:23-cv-05446-BHS Document 5 Filed 09/08/23 Page 1 of 2 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA JOHN EDWARD ROACH, CASE NO. C23-5446 BHS Petitioner, ORDER v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Grady J. Leupold’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), Dkt. 4, recommending the court dismiss petitioner John Edward Roach’s habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction, and decline to issue a Certificate of Appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
A district court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed finding or recommendations to which objection is made .” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (emphasis added); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). “The statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made , but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia , 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). A proper objection requires ORDER - 1
Case 3:23-cv-05446-BHS Document 5 Filed 09/08/23 Page 2 of 2 1 “specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations” in the R&R. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2).
Petitioner Roach has not objected to the R&R. Accordingly, Roach is not entitled to have the Court review any portion of the R&R de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Reyna-Tapia , 328 F.3d at 1121. Therefore:
(1) The R&R is ADOPTED ;
(2) Petitioner Roach’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Dkt. 1, is DENIED ; (3) This action is DISMISSED ;
(4) The Court will NOT ISSUE a Certificate of Appealability under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(2); and
(5) The Clerk shall enter a JUDGMENT and close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED .
Dated this 8th day of September, 2023.
A BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge ORDER - 2