Opinion
C18-5342 BHS
10-12-2021
SOPHEAP CHITH, Petitioner, v. RON HAYNES, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Christel's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), Dkt. 34, recommending that the Court deny pro se Petitioner Chith's Amended 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, Dkt. 31, and dismiss the case with prejudice.
A district judge must determine de novo any part of a magistrate judge's proposed disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). A proper objection requires specific written objections to the findings and recommendations in the R&R. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Objections to a R&R are not a vehicle to relitigate the same arguments carefully considered and rejected by the Magistrate Judge. See, e.g., Fix v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., CV 16-41- M-DLC-JCL, 2017 WL 2721168, at *1 (D. Mont. June 23, 2017) (collecting cases).
Chith has not objected to the R&R.
1. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED;
2. Petitioner Chith's Amended petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, Dkt. 31, is DENIED;
3. The Court will not issue a Certificate of Appealability. Chith has not made a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right” under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2). Nevertheless, while Chith's claims are not viable, it cannot be said that they are frivolous, or that he is acting in bad faith. His in forma pauperis status should continue if he appeals this Order.
4. The case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
The Clerk shall send copies of this Order to the Chith's last known address and to Magistrate Judge Creatura, enter a Judgment, and close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.