UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL NELSON BRESNAK, Case No. 2:21-cv-03206-VAP (SK)

Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT v. AND RECOMMENDATION TO

DENY HABEAS PETITION

CRAIG KOENIG, Warden, Respondent.

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the attached Report and Recommendation (R&R) to deny the habeas petition, any pertinent records as needed, and Petitioner’s objections (ECF 30). The Court has reviewed de novo those identifiable portions of the R&R to which Petitioner has timely and properly objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). In doing so, the Court has declined to consider any arguments raised for the first time only in the objections. See United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621-23 (9th Cir. 2000). It has also declined to consider objections that simply repeat arguments fully addressed but rejected in the R&R. See Trejo Perez v. Madden, 2020 WL 1154807, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2020) (objections that “merely repeat[] the same arguments . . . considered and found to be insufficient” require no review since they “do not meaningfully dispute the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations”); Hagberg v. Astrue, 2009 WL 3386595, at *1 (D. Mont. Oct. 14, 2009) (“Objections to a magistrate’s Findings and Recommendations are not a vehicle for the losing party to relitigate its case.”). Finally, the Court has declined to consider any blanket or boilerplate objection to the final disposition recommended in the R&R. See McCullock v. Tharratt, 2017 WL 6398611, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 15, 2017). The Court notes that Petitioner’s Objections do not change the Court’s determination that he has failed to establish prejudice under Strickland. Concluding that nothing in Petitioner’s objections affects the material findings and conclusions in the R&R, the Court accepts the recommendation and orders that the petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be DENIED. Judgment dismissing this action with prejudice will be entered accordingly.

IT ISSO ORDERED.

Vigna a Oe, Phetaan

DATED: __ 6/1/23

VIRGINIA A. PHILLIPS

SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE