(HC) McCoy v. Dorman ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 REGINALD L. MCCOY, No. 1:21-cv-00978-NONE-JLT (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING 13 v. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK 14 OF COURT TO ASSIGN A DISTRICT WARDEN DORMAN, JUDGE FOR PURPOSE OF CLOSING CASE 15 AND THEN TO CLOSE CASE Respondent. 16 (Doc. No. 5) 17 18 19 Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding in propria persona with a petition for writ of 20 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On June 23, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge 21 issued findings and recommendations recommending that the pending petition be dismissed. 22 (Doc. No. 5.) These findings and recommendations were served upon all parties and contained 23 notice that any objections were to be filed within twenty-one days from the date of service of that 24 order. On July 6, 2021, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (Doc. 25 No. 7.) 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 27 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including petitioner’s 28 objections, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the 1 | record and proper analysis. Petitioner’s objections present no grounds for questioning the 2 | magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 The plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) does not require the issuance of a certificate 4 | of appealability for an appeal from an order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus brought 5 | pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, as any appeal here would be, as opposed to an appeal from a final 6 | order in a habeas proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by 7 | aState court. Forde v. U.S. Parole Commission, 114 F.3d 878 (9th Cir. 1997); see Ojo v. INS, 8 | 106 F.3d 680, 681-682 (Sth Cir. 1997); Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996). 9 Accordingly, the court orders as follows: 10 1. The findings and recommendations, filed June 23, 2021 (Doc. No. 5), are 11 ADOPTED IN FULL; 12 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED; 13 3. The clerk of court is DIRECTED to assign a district judge to this case for the 14 purpose of closing the case and then to close the case; and, 15 4. No certificate of appealability is required. 16 | IT IS SO ORDERED. si □ | Dated: _ October 11, 2021 DL A Dong 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28