Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05758/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05758-5/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID E. WHITFIELD, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

J. SOLIS, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

)

___________________________________ )

CV F 04-5758 WMW HC

ORDER DISREGARDING

OBJECTIONS

[Doc. 22]

Petitioner is a prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254. On April 29th, 2005, and June 7, 2005, respectively, the parties

in this case consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C.

Section 636(c)(1).

On March 16, 2006, the undersigned entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order

dismissing this case. Judgment for Respondent was entered the same day. On March 29,

2006, Petitioner filed “objections” to the Memorandum Opinion and Order pursuant to 28

U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(C). The statutory provision relied upon by Petitioner, 28 U.S.C.

Case 1:04-cv-05758-WMW Document 23 Filed 03/31/06 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 2

Section 636(b)(1)(C), concerns the filing of findings and recommendations by a magistrate

judge and the subsequent filing of objections by a party. This statutory section is

inapplicable to the present case.

As stated above, the parties in this action both consented to the jurisdiction of the

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c)(1), which provides in part that,

“[u]pon the consent of the parties, a full-time United States magistrate judge . . . may

conduct any or all proceedings in a jury or nonjury civil matter and order the entry of

judgment in the case.” For this reason, the undersigned did not enter findings and

recommendations in this case, but entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order, which

included an order that judgment be entered for Respondent. As set forth in 28 U.S.C. Section

636(c)(3), “an aggrieved party may appeal directly to the appropriate United States court of

appeals from the judgment of the magistrate judge in the same manner as an appeal from any

other judgment of a district court.”

Accordingly, Petitioner’s objections filed March 29, 2006, shall be DISREGARDED

by the court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

mmkd34 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05758-WMW Document 23 Filed 03/31/06 Page 2 of 2