Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02290/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02290-1/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RALPH D. MORELAND,

Petitioner,

v.

UNKNOWN,

Respondent.

No. 2:19-cv-02290 GGH P

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. The matter was referred to the United 

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c). 

On November 12, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file his writ of 

habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. On December 9, 2019, the court denied the motion for extension of 

time and granted petitioner thirty days from the date of the order to file an in forma pauperis 

affidavit or pay the required filing fee and file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to 

properly commence his federal habeas action. ECF No. 3. Petitioner was warned that failure to 

comply with the court’s order and deadlines would result in a recommendation that this matter be 

dismissed. Id. at 3. Petitioner has not responded to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to 

prosecute this case.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk assign a district judge to this case;

Further, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without 

Case 2:19-cv-02290-JAM-GGH Document 5 Filed 01/30/20 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

prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

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 fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within 

fourteen 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: January 30, 2020

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-02290-JAM-GGH Document 5 Filed 01/30/20 Page 2 of 2