Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01362/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01362-1/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 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SEAN BEARD, )

)

Petitioner, )

vs. )

)

)

JEFF WRIGLEY, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

)

)

___________________________________ )

1:06-cv-01362-OWW WMW HC

ORDER ADOPTING

FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS RE

MOTION FOR MOTION TO

DISMISS PETITION FOR

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

[Doc. 4, 5]

Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a petition

for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Pending before the court is

Respondent’s motion to dismiss. Petitioner has not opposed the motion.

On April 10, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein. 

These findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the

parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty

days. Petitioner did not file objections. 

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

Case 1:06-cv-01362-OWW -WMW Document 6 Filed 06/07/07 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

conducted a de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708

F.2d 452, 454 (9 Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the th

findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis the

Institution has considered Petitioner’s request for assignment to a RRC under the correct

legal standard. 

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on 

 April 10, 2007, are a adopted in full;

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss this petition is GRANTED;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED as moot;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this

case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01362-OWW -WMW Document 6 Filed 06/07/07 Page 2 of 2