Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00714/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00714-5/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

27

28

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT L. HUGHES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

KEN CLARK, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

1:06-CV-00714 DLB HC 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

AND DISMISSING PETITION WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

[Doc. #31]

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The parties having voluntarily consented to exercise of Magistrate

Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), by order dated March 7, 2007, this case was

assigned to the undersigned for all purposes, including entry of final judgment.

On March 22, 2007, the undersigned issued an Order granting Petitioner leave to withdraw

the unexhausted claims from the petition in lieu of dismissal. On April 13, 2007, Petitioner filed a

motion requesting the petition be set aside so he could return to state court to exhaust his four

unexhausted claims. 

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

dismissed by the [Petitioner] without order of court by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before

Case 1:06-cv-00714-DLB Document 32 Filed 05/08/07 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

27

28

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California 2

service by the adverse party of an answer or of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first

occurs, or (ii) by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the

action. Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is without

prejudice, . . . .” Pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the "Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure, to the extent that they are not inconsistent with these rules, may be applied, when

appropriate, to petitions filed under these rules." At this time, Respondent has not filed a formal

answer to the petition for writ of habeas corpus. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

Petitioner is forewarned that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)

imposes a statute of limitations of one year in which a petitioner must file a federal petition for writ

of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). In addition, Petitioner is forewarned that in the event he

returns to federal court, he must file a petition with fully exhausted claims. In the event he files a

petition with unexhausted claims, the petition may be dismissed with prejudice. Slack v. McDaniel,

529 U.S. 473, 489 (2000). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 8, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00714-DLB Document 32 Filed 05/08/07 Page 2 of 2