Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02581/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02581-5/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 his January 14, 2010 objections, petitioner requested an extension of time until

February 8, 2010 to file an amended petition. This request will be denied as unnecessary. 

Petitioner’s amended petition shall be filed within thirty days of this order, not the filing date of

the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

G.W. RENNELS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-2581 WBS EFB P

vs.

D.K. SISTO, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ

of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

On December 17, 2009, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. 

Petitioner has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.1

///

Case 2:07-cv-02581-WBS-EFB Document 19 Filed 02/26/10 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

2

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and

by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed December 17, 2009, are adopted in

full; 

2. Respondent’s July 27, 2009 motion to dismiss is granted;

3. Petitioner is given 30 days to file an amended petition deleting the

unexhausted claims and is admonished that failure to file an amended petition will result in the

dismissal

of this action without prejudice;

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the form for filing a

petition for writ of habeas corpus; 

5. Respondent is ordered to respond to any amended petition within twenty-one

days after petitioner’s filing; and

6. Petitioner’s January 14, 2010, request for an extension of time is denied as

unnecessary.

DATED: February 25, 2010

Case 2:07-cv-02581-WBS-EFB Document 19 Filed 02/26/10 Page 2 of 2