1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GEORGE EUGENE CROSS, also known No. 2:09-CV-0488-TLN-DMC-P as Arcion, 12 Petitioner, 13 ORDER v. 14 MICHAEL CORONA, 15 Respondent. 16

17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brought this petition for a writ of habeas 19 corpus pursuant to

. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 20 Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules. 21 Final judgment was entered in this case on March 31, 2010. (ECF No. 62.) On February 22 5, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations addressing Petitioner’s motion 23 for reconsideration, which were served on the parties, and which contained notice that the parties 24 may file objections within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 115.) Petitioner filed timely objections. 25 (ECF No. 125.) 26 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 28 See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 1 | magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 2 | Having reviewed the file, including Petitioner’s objections, the Court finds the findings and 3 || recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 5 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 5, 2025, (ECF No. 115), are 6 ADOPTED in full; 7 2. Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration, (ECF No. 75), is DENIED; 8 3. All other pending post-judgment motions, (ECF Nos. 79, 82, 83, 84, 86, 90, 94, 97, 9 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 119, 120, 124, 126, and 132) are DENIED as moot; 10 4. Any similar future requests will be disregarded; and 11 5. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 12 | DATED: March 28, 2025 13 14 Z, 16 TROY L. NUNLEY CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28