Vardanyan v. Gonzales et al

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 18 ; ORDER Dismissing Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus; ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Enter Judgment signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 2/9/2009. CASE CLOSED.(Esteves, C)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ROBERT VARDANYAN, 9 Petitioner, 10 v. 11 ANTONIO GONZALES, et al., 12 Respondents. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On October 31, 2008, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case filed Findings and Recommendations recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied. (Doc. 18). The Findings and Recommendations were served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fifteen days from the date of service of that order. Petitioner requested, and was granted, an extension of time to file his objections until December 29, 2008. (Doc. 20). To date, however, no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations have been filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. /// ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:07-cv-01246 OWW-TAG (HC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 18) ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 1) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER JUDGMENT

U N IT E D STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed October 31, 2008 (Doc. 18), are ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED; and 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to ENTER JUDGMENT for Respondent and close the file. This order terminates the action in its entirety. The plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 2253( c)(1) does not require a certificate of appealability because this is an appeal from an order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, not a final order in a habeas proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court. Forde v. U.S. Parole Commission, 114 F.3d 878 (9th Cir. 1997); Ojo v. I.N.S., 106 F.3d 680, 681-682 (5th Cir. 1997); Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996).

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 9, 2009 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2