Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05641/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05641-0/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OMAR KAHLIFE KING, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:04-cv-05641-AWI-DLB-HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 10)

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

WITHDRAW UNEXHAUSTED CLAIMS

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

DISMISS UNEXHAUSTED CLAIMS AS

MOOT (Doc. 7)

ORDER DISMISSING GROUNDS TWO

AND FOUR

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO FILE

AMENDED PETITION LODGED MARCH

15, 2005

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On March 22, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations that Petitioner's request to withdraw the

unexhausted claims be GRANTED, that Respondent's motion to dismiss

the unexhausted claims be DENIED as MOOT, that Grounds Two and Four

be DISMISSED, without prejudice, for failure to exhaust; and, that

the amended petition, lodged March 15, 2005, be FILED.

Case 1:04-cv-05641-AWI-DLB Document 11 Filed 05/24/05 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

These Findings and Recommendations were served on all parties

and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within

thirty (30) days from the date of service of that order. To date,

the parties have not filed timely objections to the Findings and

Recommendations.

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 concludes that

the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations is supported by

the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed March 22, 2005,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Petitioner's request to withdraw the unexhausted claims

is GRANTED;

3. Respondent's motion to dismiss the unexhausted claims is

DENIED as MOOT;

4. Grounds Two and Four are DISMISSED, without prejudice,

for failure to exhaust; and,

5. The Clerk of Court FILE the amended petition, lodged

March 15, 2005. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 24, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05641-AWI-DLB Document 11 Filed 05/24/05 Page 2 of 2