Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01262/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01262-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PHILLIP EUGENE LABARR,

Petitioner,

v.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA,

Respondent.

No. 1:24-cv-01262-SKO (HC)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 

TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

TO DISMISS PETITION

[21-DAY DEADLINE]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for 

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He filed the instant petition on September 

23, 2024. After conducting a preliminary review, the Court determined that the petition failed to 

state a claim for relief, failed to show exhaustion of state remedies, and failed to name a proper 

respondent. Therefore, on October 18, 2024, the Court issued an order dismissing the petition and 

granting Petitioner leave to file an amended petition. (Doc. 8.) Petitioner was granted thirty days 

to do so. Over thirty days have now passed, and Petitioner has failed to file an amended petition 

in accordance with the Court’s order. Therefore, the Court will recommend the petition be 

dismissed. 

ORDER

The Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district judge to the case.

Case 1:24-cv-01262-KES-SKO Document 10 Filed 12/02/24 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

RECOMMENDATION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby RECOMMENDS that the petition be 

dismissed for failure to state a claim for relief, failure to exhaust state remedies, and failure to 

name a proper respondent.

This Findings and Recommendation is submitted to the United States District Court Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the 

Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Within 

twenty-one (21) days after being served with a copy of this Findings and Recommendation, 

Petitioner may file written objections with the Court. Id. The document should be captioned, 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation” and shall not exceed fifteen 

(15) pages, except by leave of court with good cause shown. The Court will not consider exhibits 

attached to the Objections. Any pages filed in excess of the fifteen (15) page limitation may be 

disregarded by the District Judge when reviewing these Findings and Recommendations pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C). Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 

specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 

838-39 (9th Cir. 2014). This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Federal Rules 

of Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the District Court's judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 27, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-01262-KES-SKO Document 10 Filed 12/02/24 Page 2 of 2