ANCER HAGGERTY, District Judge
Magistrate Judge Hubel issued a Findings and Recommendation in this action (Doc. #14), in which the Magistrate Judge recommended that respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #9) be granted, petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #5) be denied, and judgment should be entered, without prejudice. No objections were filed.
The matter is now before the court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). A district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations" made by a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within ten days of being served with a copy of the Findings and Recommendation, any party may file written objections and the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the Findings and Recommendation to which objections are made. Id. When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation of the Magistrate. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-150 (1985); Campbell v. United States District Court, 501 F.2d 196 (9th Cir. 1974). No clear error appears on the face of the record, and the court adopts Magistrate Judge Hubel's Findings and Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation (Doc. #14) is adopted. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #9) is GRANTED and petitioner's Amended Writ for Habeas Corpus (Doc. #5) is DENIED. Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.