Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02632/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02632-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLES K. JOHNSON,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-2632 MCE DAD P

vs.

ROBERT A. HOREL, Acting Warden,

et al.,

Respondents. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed November 22, 2006, petitioner was ordered to file a completed

application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the appropriate filing fee within thirty days. In

addition, petitioner’s petition was dismissed and thirty days’ leave to file an amended petition

was granted. Petitioner was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not filed

a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, has not paid the appropriate filing fee, has

not filed an amended petition, and has not otherwise responded to the court’s order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

Case 2:06-cv-02632-MCE -DAD Document 5 Filed 01/05/07 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

2

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: January 4, 2007.

DAD:lg

john2632.fifp.fta

Case 2:06-cv-02632-MCE -DAD Document 5 Filed 01/05/07 Page 2 of 2