Matecki v. Amsberry

Filing 72

ORDER: The Court adopts Magistrate Judge You's Findings and Recommendation No. 66 . Therefore, Petitioner's Motion Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 23 is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on June 22, 2021, by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (pvh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

JOHN JAY MATECKI, III,
Petitioner,

No. 2:18-cv-00461-YY
ORDER

v.
BRIGITTE AMSBERRY,

Respondent.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge You issued a Findings and Recommendation on March 24, 2021, in
which she recommends that this Court deny Petitioner’s Second Amended Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus [23]. F&R, ECF No. 66. 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).

1 - ORDER

Petitioner filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation.
Pet’r’s Obj., ECF No. 70. 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 You’s Findings and Recommendation No. 66.
Therefore, Petitioner’s Motion Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [23] is
denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

June 22, 2021
DATED: _______________________.

___________________________
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge

2 - ORDER