(HC) Martin v. Pfeiffer ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DOUGLAS M. MARTIN, No. 2:21-cv-0587 KJM KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as 19 provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 13, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Neither party filed objections 23 to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed 27 the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 28 the magistrate judge’s analysis. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 13, 2021, are adopted in full; 3 2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) is granted; 4 3. This action is dismissed with prejudice; and 5 4. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 6 || § 2253. 7 || DATED: May 23, 2022. 8 9 ( ti / ¢ q_/ 10 CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28