Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00627/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00627-3/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

The court notes that the copy of the findings and recommendations served on Petitioner 1

was returned as undeliverable. However, the copy was served on Petitioner at his address of

record and was therefore fully effective. Local Rule 83-182.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE AGUILAR MARTINEZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

v. )

)

JOHN ASHCROFT, )

)

Respondent. )

)

____________________________________)

CV F 05-0627 OWW WMW HC

ORDER ADOPTING

FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

[Doc. 10]

Petitioner, a federal prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2241 . The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 

On November 30, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein. 

These findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the

parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty

days. No objections were filed.1

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

Case 1:05-cv-00627-OWW -WMW Document 12 Filed 03/16/06 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 2

de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454

(9 Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and th

recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on 

 November 30, 2005, are a adopted in full;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed for failure to prosecute;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this

case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 15, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00627-OWW -WMW Document 12 Filed 03/16/06 Page 2 of 2