Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01044/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01044-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL J. KIMBRELL,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-1044 FCD EFB P

vs.

STEVE MOORE, et al., 

Respondents. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See 28

U.S.C. § 2254.

On September 4, 2009, respondents moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that

petitioner has failed to exhaust his available state remedies. On December 4, 2009, the court

informed petitioner of the requirements for filing an opposition to any motion to dismiss. That

order gave petitioner an additional 30 days to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition

and warned him that failure to do so could result in dismissal. 

The 30 days have passed and petitioner has not filed an opposition or a statement of no

opposition nor otherwise responded to the December 4, 2009 order.

////

////

Case 2:08-cv-01044-FCD-EFB Document 13 Filed 03/01/10 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

2

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Rule 12, Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). In

his objections petitioner may address whether a certificate of appealability should issue in the

event he files an appeal of the judgment in this case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it

enters a final order adverse to the applicant).

Dated: March 1, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01044-FCD-EFB Document 13 Filed 03/01/10 Page 2 of 2