1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICO RILEY, Case No. 2:24-cv-1363-TLN-JDP (P) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 PRUDHLE, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to

. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On November 5, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on petitioner, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. The deadline has passed, and no 23 objections have been filed. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

(9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] 28 court[.]”). The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 1 | supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 5, 2024, (ECF No. 5), are 4 ADOPTED in full; 5 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee, to 6 prosecute, and to comply with court orders for the reasons set forth in the prior order 7 on September 30, 2024, (ECF No. 4); 8 3. The Court DECLINES to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 9 § 2253; and 10 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 11 | DATE: December 5, 2024 12 13 14 15 TROY L. NUNLEY 16 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28