Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00206/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00206-2/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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLOS ALBERT MUNOZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

1:10-CV-00206 GSA HC

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW

CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT

BE IMPOSED FOR FAILING TO COMPLY

WITH A COURT ORDER

[Doc. #5]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On February 10, 2010, the Court ordered Petitioner to file a completed consent option form. 

Petitioner did not comply. Therefore, on March 29, 2010, a second order was issued. Again,

Petitioner did not comply. Accordingly, on May 4, 2010, the Court issued an order directing

Petitioner to show cause why the petition should not be dismissed for failing to comply with a court

order. 

On May 18, 2010, Petitioner responded to the order to show cause and filed a consent form

indicating consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Petitioner states he did not respond because he

did not intend to file the instant action in this Court. He states the petition was inadvertently mailed

U.S. District Court

E. D. California 1

Case 1:10-cv-00206-GSA Document 9 Filed 06/02/10 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

27

28

to the federal court. He states he does not wish to pursue his federal remedies at this time, but

desires to return to state court to exhaust his available state remedies.

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an action may be

dismissed by a petitioner without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing

party serves an answer. Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), an action may be dismissed at a petitioner’s

request by court order. In this case, Respondent has not filed an answer to the petition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1) The order to show cause dated May 4, 2010, is DISCHARGED; 

2) The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and 

3) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 1, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

U.S. District Court

E. D. California 2

Case 1:10-cv-00206-GSA Document 9 Filed 06/02/10 Page 2 of 2