1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BERNARD K. REED, 12 Petitioner, No. 2:24-cv-3524-TLN-JDP (P)

13 v. ORDER 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner Bernard K. Reed (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this 18 application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

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

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 9, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on Petitioner and which contained notice that any objections were to be filed within 22 fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 9.) This deadline has passed, and no objections have been filed. 23 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. 25 See Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 26 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 27 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 28 the record and by the proper analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 9, 2025, (ECF No. 9), are ADOPTED 3 in full; 4 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim, failure to 5 prosecute, and failure to comply with court orders for the reasons set forth in the April 28, 6 2025, order; 7 3. The Court DECLINES to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 8 § 2253; and 9 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case and to enter judgment accordingly. 10 11 | Date: October 23, 2025 Lal 13 TROY L. NUNLEY 14 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28