Van Keyshone Rollen v. M. E. Spearman

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VAN KEYSHONE ROLLEN, Case No. 5:18-cv-01042-RGK-MAA

12 Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT 13 v. AND RECOMMENDATION OF

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

14 M.E. SPEARMAN, JUDGE 15 Respondent. 16 17 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended 18 Petition (“SAP”), the other records on file herein, and the Report and 19 Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court also has 20 reviewed Petitioner’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation, which the 21 Court received and filed on February 22, 2021 (“Objections”). (Objs., ECF No. 22 71.) As required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(3), the Court has 23 engaged in de novo review of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to 24 which Petitioner specifically has objected. 25 First, Petitioner asserts that the Report and Recommendation “assumes facts 26 not in evidence,” misrepresents or misquotes evidence, and “calls for speculation.” 27 (Id. at 1.) However, Petitioner…