Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00118/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00118-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEKSANDR YAKOVLEV,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-0118 MCE DAD P

vs.

CHARLES DeMORE, et al.,

Respondents. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Petitioner filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241 challenging his detention at the Yuba County Jail by the U.S. Immigration and

Naturalization Service. On May 1, 2007, the United States Attorney’s Office filed a motion to

dismiss the amended petition as moot because petitioner has been released from custody on an

order of supervision. On May 21, 2007, the court ordered petitioner to file his opposition or a

statement of non-opposition to respondents’ motion to dismiss. Petitioner has failed to respond

to the court’s order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that respondents’ May 1, 2007

motion to dismiss be granted and this action be dismissed. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

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

Case 2:07-cv-00118-MCE -DAD Document 12 Filed 06/26/07 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

2

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 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: June 26, 2007.

DAD:4

yako0118.157

Case 2:07-cv-00118-MCE -DAD Document 12 Filed 06/26/07 Page 2 of 2