Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00215/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00215-2/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALIDAD ALIBABA AHADPOUR,

Petitioner,

v.

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, et al.,

Respondents.

No. 1:19-cv-00215-DAD-JDP (HC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

HABEAS PETITION FOR FAILURE TO 

PROSECUTE

(Doc. No. 8)

Petitioner Alidad Alibaba Ahadpour is a former federal detainee proceeding pro se with a 

petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 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 November 21, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge ordered petitioner to show cause 

why his petition should not be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 6.) However, the 

order was returned to the court unserved as undeliverable with a notation explaining that 

petitioner is no longer in federal immigration custody. Petitioner had until February 13, 2019 to 

update the court with a new address of record but failed to do so. Accordingly, on February 26, 

2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that 

the petition for federal habeas relief be denied due to petitioner’s failure to prosecute and failure 

to comply with the court’s orders. (Doc. No. 8.) The findings and recommendations were served 

Case 1:19-cv-00215-DAD-JDP Document 9 Filed 04/21/20 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

on petitioner and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) 

days of service. (Id. at 3.) No objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now 

passed. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on February 26, 2020 (Doc. No. 8) are

adopted in full;

2. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) is denied without prejudice; 

and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00215-DAD-JDP Document 9 Filed 04/21/20 Page 2 of 2