Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06337/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06337-2/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARTHUR ROBBINS, III, )

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

TOM L. CAREY, )

)

)

Respondent. )

)

 )

1:04-cv-06337-OWW-TAG HC 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 14)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF

HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 7)

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED PETITION

FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 5)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner Arthur Robbins, III, (hereinafter “Petitioner”) is a state prisoner proceeding

pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On July 14, 2005, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case filed a Report and

Recommendations recommending Respondent’s motion to dismiss the amended petition for writ

of habeas corpus be GRANTED and the action be dismissed because of the presence of

unexhausted claims in the amended petition. (Doc. 14). This Report and Recommendations was

served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30)

days from the date of service of that order, and that if Petitioner wished to proceed with the

amended petition, he must first withdraw the unexhausted claims. To date, the parties have not

filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendations, nor has Petitioner filed a request to

withdraw the unexhausted claims.

Case 1:04-cv-06337-OWW -TAG Document 15 Filed 09/27/05 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

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, the Court concludes that

the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations is supported by the record and proper

analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendations, filed July 14, 2005, (Doc. 14) is ADOPTED

IN FULL;

2. Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss the amended petition for writ of habeas corpus

(Doc. 7) is GRANTED;

3. The amended petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 5) is DISMISSED; and

4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to ENTER JUDGMENT and close the file. 

This order terminates the action in its entirety. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 26, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06337-OWW -TAG Document 15 Filed 09/27/05 Page 2 of 2