Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00039/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00039-1/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

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN WADE LEWIS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

)

DERRAL G. ADAMS, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-CV-0039 AWI SMS HC 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION 

[Doc. #3]

ORDER DISMISSING GROUND THREE

FROM THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF

HABEAS CORPUS

ORDER REFERRING MATTER BACK TO

MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER

PROCEEDINGS 

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On January 27, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that

recommended Ground Three of the petition be DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling in a

separate action. This Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice

that any objections to the Findings and Recommendation were to be filed within thirty (30) days of

the date of service of the order. Over thirty (30) days have passed and no party has filed objections.

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 finds that the Findings

Case 1:06-cv-00039-SMS Document 4 Filed 03/22/06 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

and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued January 27, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. Ground Three of the petition is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

3. The matter is REFERRED BACK to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 21, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00039-SMS Document 4 Filed 03/22/06 Page 2 of 2