Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01536/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01536-3/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

RODERICK WASHINGTON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

A. K. SCRIBNER, et al., )

)

Respondents. )

 )

1:05-CV-1536 REC LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION 

[Doc. #21]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT 

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On February 15, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that the 

petition for writ of habeas corpus be DISMISSED for failure to comply with a court order.

Specifically, Petitioner failed to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee

as ordered by the Magistrate Judge. 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. 

On February 22, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. In

Case 1:05-cv-01536-OWW -LJO Document 24 Filed 04/27/06 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

his objections, Petitioner stated his efforts were thwarted and he has been delayed in complying with

the Court’s order by prison staff. Thus, on March 3, 2006, the Magistrate Judge granted Petitioner an

extension of time of thirty (30) days to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the

filing fee. Over thirty (30) days have passed and Petitioner has failed to comply with the Court’s

order or respond in any other fashion.

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

and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued February 15, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 27, 2006 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01536-OWW -LJO Document 24 Filed 04/27/06 Page 2 of 2