Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01488/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01488-5/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RODERICK WASHINGTON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

ALLEN K. SCRIBNER, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-cv-01488-AWI-TAG HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

(Doc. 13)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REOPEN

CASE AND/OR VACATE JUDGMENT

(Doc. 8)

Petitioner is a state prisoner who had been proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On October 13, 2006, the Court entered judgment dismissing the original petition in this case

for Petitioner's failure to pay the $5.00 filing fee. (Doc. 7). On September 9, 2007, Petitioner filed a

motion to reopen the case or vacate judgment. (Doc. 8). October 18, 2007, the Magistrate Judge

assigned to the case filed a Findings and Recommendation recommending that the motion to reopen

the case or vacate judgment be denied. (Doc. 13). The Findings and Recommendation was served

on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fifteen days from the

date of service of that order. On October 26, 2007, Petitioner filed objections to the Magistrate

Judge's Findings and Recommendation. (Doc. 14). 

Case 1:05-cv-01488-AWI-TAG Document 15 Filed 11/05/07 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

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, including Petitioner's objections,

the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is supported by the

record and proper analysis. Petitioner's objections present no grounds for questioning the Magistrate

Judge's analysis. Petitioner fails to provide evidence that prison officials prohibited him from

paying the filing fee or filing a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis for a year. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued October 18, 2007 (Doc. 13), is ADOPTED

IN FULL; and,

2. The motion to reopen the case and/or vacate the judgment (Doc. 8), is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01488-AWI-TAG Document 15 Filed 11/05/07 Page 2 of 2