United States District Court, C.D. California
August 16, 2014
STEVEN DEXTER BROOKS, Petitioner,
C. WOFFORD, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DAVID O. CARTER, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
In addition, on the same date that Petitioner filed his Objections to the Report and Recommendation, he filed a "Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Petition to Cure Claim Defects" ("Motion"), along with a proposed Second Amended Petition asserting new legal claims. Petitioner has not shown good cause for failing to bring these legal claims earlier. Additionally, the filing of the Motion after the issuance of the Report and Recommendation and on the eve of the entry of judgment appears to be an intentionally dilatory litigation tactic. See Rhines v. Weber , 544 U.S. 269, 277, 125 S.Ct. 1528, 161 L.Ed.2d 440 (2005); Hurn v. Retirement Fund Trust , 648 F.2d 1252, 1254 (9th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, Petitioner's Motion is denied.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judgment be entered (1) denying the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus; and (2) dismissing this action with prejudice.