Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01896/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01896-2/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT F. SCHUH, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

DENNIS SMITH, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-cv-01896-LJO-TAG HC 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

(Doc. 10)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

(Doc. 8)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

(Doc. 1)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 1). 

On May 16, 2007, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the grounds that the

petition was premature. (Doc. 8). On October 4, 2007, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case

filed a Findings and Recommendation recommending that Respondent's motion to dismiss be

granted. (Doc. 10). The Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and contained

notice that any objections were to be filed within twenty days from the date of service of that order. 

On October 17, 2007, Petitioner filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and

Case 1:06-cv-01896-LJO -TAG Document 12 Filed 11/02/07 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

Recommendation. (Doc. 11). 

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, including Petitioner's objections,

the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is supported by the

record and proper analysis. Petitioner's objections present no grounds for questioning the Magistrate

Judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued October 4, 2007 (Doc. 10), is ADOPTED IN

FULL; 

2. Respondent's motion to dismiss (Doc. 8), is GRANTED;

3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED; and

4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to ENTER JUDGMENT for Respondent and close the

file.

This order terminates the action in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

66h44d UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01896-LJO -TAG Document 12 Filed 11/02/07 Page 2 of 2