Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01225/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01225-7/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

CARLTON HILLMON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

K. MENDOZA-POWERS, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-cv-01225-AWI-SMS-HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 20)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

DISMISS (Doc. 10)

Petitioner, represented by counsel, is a state prisoner

proceeding with a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. 

On October 19, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations that Respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim for relief

be DENIED, and the matter be referred back to the Magistrate Judge

for issuance of a further scheduling order. 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 objections to the Findings and Recommendations.

Case 1:05-cv-01225-LJO -SMS Document 21 Filed 01/03/07 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

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 are supported

by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed October 19, 2006,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction and failure to state a claim for relief, filed June

12, 2006, is DENIED; and,

3. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for

issuance of a further scheduling order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 30, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01225-LJO -SMS Document 21 Filed 01/03/07 Page 2 of 2