Case 2:20-cv-09659-JWH-PD Document 27 Filed 04/29/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:10154

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 DEREK PAUL SMYER, Case No. 2:20-cv-09659-JWH (PD) 11 Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,

12 v. AND RECOMMENDATION OF

UNITED STATES

13 STUART SHERMAN, Warden, MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND

DENYING APPLICATION FOR

14 Respondent. CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 2:20-cv-09659-JWH-PD Document 27 Filed 04/29/22 Page2of2 Page ID #:10155

1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the 2 || records on file, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 3 || Judge (“Report”), Petitioner’s Objections to the Report, and the Supplemental 4 || Statement of Decision issued by the Magistrate Judge. The Court has 5 || engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which 6 || Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the Report and the Supplemental 7 || Statement of Decision and adopts them as its own findings and conclusions. 8 || Accordingly, the Petition is dismissed with prejudice. 9 The Court has also reviewed Petitioner’s Application for Certificate of 10 || Appealability [Dkt. No. 25], which sets forth arguments previously advanced 11 || by Petitioner in the Petition and in his Objections to the Report. For the 12 || reasons stated in the Report and the Supplemental Statement of Decision, the 13 || Court finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial 14 || of a constitutional right and, therefore, a certificate of appealability is 15 | DENIED. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. 16 |) Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. : TH 19 | DATED: April 29, 2022 ° 20 JOHN W.HOLCOMB 41 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28