What is the state of the law on admonishment in response to the objection to the prosecutor's description of reasonable doubt?

The majority concludes that the district court's admonition in response to the objection to the prosecutor's description of reasonable doubt did not "sufficiently 'neutralize[]' the prejudice," Maj. Op. 15-16 (quoting Birges, 723 F.2d at 672; United States v. Weatherspoon, 410 F.3d 1142, 1151 (9th Cir. 2005)), because the prosecutor "provided numerous improper examples" that reduced the government's burden of proof, "all without further admonishment." Maj. Op. 16. But this description of the court's response to the closing argument distorts what occurred. As set forth above, defense counsel did not object to the prosecutor's comment giving examples-getting out of bed, eating, and driving-which the prosecutor listed immediately after the court's admonition that the jury should follow its instructions and not follow "what any attorney says the standard of reasonable doubt is."