ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
George Z. Singal U.S. District Judge
The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on December 31, 2014, his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 17). Petitioner filed four Motions to extend Time to Respond to Recommended Decision (ECF Nos. 20, 22, 24 & 26), all of which were granted. Petitioner filed a Fifth Motion to Extend to Respond to Recommended Decision (ECF No. 28) which was denied and is to be treated as Petitioner’s Objection to the Recommended Decision. In addition, the Magistrate Judge gave the Petitioner the opportunity to supplement his objection to the Recommended Decision on or before April 24, 2015. Petitioner filed an Objection to the Order denying his Fifth Motion to Extend (ECF No. 31) on April 27, 2015.
I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.
1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.
2. It is ORDERED that a request for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED as it is not warranted under Rule 8 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 cases.
3. It is ORDERED that Petitioner’s 28 U.S.C. §2254 Petition (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED.
4. It is ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED because there is no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right ...