(HC) Jones v. Long

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAUL LEE JONES, No. 2:19-cv-01261-TLN-KJN

Petitioner, v. ORDER

J. LONG, et al.,

Respondents.

Petitioner Paul Lee Jones (“Petitioner”), a prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On December 2, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 25.) On December 30, 2020, Petitioner was granted a sixty (60) day extension of time to file objections. (ECF No. 27.) Sixty days passed and Petitioner did not file objections.

The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 26 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed December 2, 2020 (ECF No. 25), are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Respondent J. Long’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED; and 3. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 8 | 2253.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 17, 2021 fy /) “ □□ Vln United States District Judge