Bowen v. Taylor ( 2020 )

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 28 U.S.C. § 636(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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (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 28 U.S.C. § 2253(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