(HC) Pineda-Castro v. Warden, FCI Herlong

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Noe Pineda-Castro, No. 2:23-cv-00490-KJM-DMC-P 12 Petitioner,

ORDER

13 v.

14 Warden – FCI Herlong, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of 18 habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge as provided by Eastern District of California local rules. 20 On February 1, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, 21 which were served on the parties, and which contained notice that the parties may file objections 22 within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been 23 filed. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 25 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 26 reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations 27 of law by the magistrate judge…