Opinion
ORDER
KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On April 5, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, 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 (14) days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 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). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed April 5, 2013, are adopted in full.
2. Petitioner's motion for leave to amend, ECF No. 26, is granted as to Claims One and Two of the proposed amended petition.
3. Petitioner's motion for leave to amend, ECF No. 26, is denied as to Claim Three of the proposed amended petition, and Claim Three is stricken.
4. The proposed amended petition, as modified, is deemed filed nunc pro tunc to the date of its submission on August 15, 2012.