Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02625/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02625-1/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

MICHAEL L. ESPINOZA,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-2625 GEB KJM P

vs.

ROBERT A. HOREL, Acting Warden,

et al.,

Respondents. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed November 22, 2006, petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus

was dismissed and thirty days leave to file an amended petition and application to proceed in

forma pauperis was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not filed

an amended petition, application to proceed in forma pauperis or 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

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

Case 2:06-cv-02625-GEB -KJM Document 4 Filed 01/19/07 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

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 19, 2007. 

/mp

espi2625.ftafifphc

Case 2:06-cv-02625-GEB -KJM Document 4 Filed 01/19/07 Page 2 of 2