Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01092/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01092-1/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

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN ANDREW GRESCHNER, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

KEN CLARK, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-CV-01092 OWW LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. #4]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

[Doc. #1]

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

On September 15, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that

recommended the petition be DISMISSED for failure to allege grounds that would entitle Petitioner

to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Magistrate Judge further recommended that the Clerk of Court

be DIRECTED to enter judgment. The Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and

contained notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of service of

the order. 

On October 4, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

Case 1:06-cv-01092-OWW -LJO Document 6 Filed 10/18/06 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 cd 2

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

novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Petitioner's objections,

the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is supported by the

record and proper analysis. Petitioner's objections present no grounds for questioning the Magistrate

Judge's analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued September 15, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED; and

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment for Respondent and against

Petitioner.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01092-OWW -LJO Document 6 Filed 10/18/06 Page 2 of 2