Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00352/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00352-3/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

)

WALTER REAMY, JR., )

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

BERNARD ELLIS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1: 05-cv- 0352 OWW WMW HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS RE RESPONDENT’S

MOTION TO DISMISS

[Doc. 10, 11]

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a Petition for 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 February 12, 2007, 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. Petitioner filed a notice of appeal on February 23, 2007, depriving this court of

jurisdiction. Petitioner did not file objections. This case was returned from the Ninth Circuit on

July 9, 2007. 

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

Case 1:05-cv-00352-LJO -WMW Document 19 Filed 11/13/07 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 

February 12, 2007, are a adopted in full;

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED;

3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED;

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

case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 9, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00352-LJO -WMW Document 19 Filed 11/13/07 Page 2 of 2