Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01035/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01035-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 In fact, on July 2, 2007, the Findings and Recommendation were returned to the Court as undeliverable. 

1

(Court Doc. 11.) Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f) each party is under a continuing duty to inform the Court of any

change of address. Absent such notice, service of documents at the prior address of record of the party is effective

service. Local Rule 83-182(f). 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN H. ALVIES,

Petitioner,

v.

PAUL SHULTZ,

Respondent.

 /

CV F 05-1035 LJO SMS HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. 10]

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

On June 22, 2007, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that the

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be DENIED. This Findings and Recommendation was

served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30)

days of the date of service of the order. Over thirty (30) days have passed and no party has filed

objections.

1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted

a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the

Findings and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Case 1:05-cv-01035-LJO -SMS Document 12 Filed 09/05/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued June 22, 2007, is ADOPTED IN

FULL;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment for Respondent. This

terminates this action in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 5, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01035-LJO -SMS Document 12 Filed 09/05/07 Page 2 of 2