Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01119/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01119-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE CONSERVATORSHIP OF 

VERLA N. JONES, CIV S-05-1119 MCE GGH PS

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

This action has been referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 72-

302(c)(21). Annamarie Jones is the daughter of petitioner Verla Jones, and is proceeding in this

action pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus as a next friend. Annamarie Jones seeks to

have her mother released from a nursing home.

On July 1, 2005, petitioner was directed to file an amended petition which names

the proper respondent. On July 11, 2005, petitioner filed a pleading captioned “amended

petition;” however, it did not contain any claims, but only listed individuals who might be proper

respondents. On August 10, 2005, petitioner was given another opportunity to file a second

amended petition within thirty days which included all of her claims and named the proper

respondent. Petitioner was warned that failure to comply with the order would result in dismissal

of the petition. On September 16, 2005, more than thirty days after instructed, plaintiff filed a

letter which states that once a petition is filed, an evidentiary hearing must be set and the person

must be released. Petitioner did not comply with this court’s orders and did not file a second

amended petition.

Case 2:05-cv-01119-MCE -GGH Document 8 Filed 10/26/05 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

2

Good Cause Appearing, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten (10)

days 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 reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten (10) 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: 10/25/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH/076

Jones1119.dis.wpd

Case 2:05-cv-01119-MCE -GGH Document 8 Filed 10/26/05 Page 2 of 2