Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01117/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01117-1/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ROBERT BLAIR, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION, 

Respondents. 

No. 2:15-cv-1117 AC P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS & 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 By order filed January 11, 2016, petitioner was ordered to show cause, within thirty days, 

why this action should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. ECF 

No. 5. Petitioner was advised that failure to respond to the order would result in a 

recommendation to dismiss the petition. Id. The thirty day period has now expired, and 

petitioner, who is represented by counsel, has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the 

court’s order. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a 

United States District Judge to this action. 

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to exhaust 

administrative remedies. 

 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 fourteen days 

Case 2:15-cv-01117-TLN-AC Document 6 Filed 02/25/16 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

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 

objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 

parties are 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: February 24, 2016 

Case 2:15-cv-01117-TLN-AC Document 6 Filed 02/25/16 Page 2 of 2