(HC) Pulizzano v. Benavidez ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES JOSEPH PULIZZANO, No. 2:21-cv-0503 WBS CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 JENNIFER BENAVIDEZ, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On November 28, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to 23 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 27 reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record 28 and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 28, 2022, are adopted in full; 3 2. Claim 2 in petitioner’s amended petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied; 4 3. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 26) is denied as moot; and 5 4. Respondent is directed to file an answer with respect to claims | and 3 appearing in 6 | petitioner’s amended petition for writ of habeas corpus within 30 days. 7 Dated: January 5, 2023 / 4 , . ak. 2 / 8 WILLIAMB.SHUBB i (isis 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 puli0503.jo 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28