Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02711/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02711-1/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

 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff

was properly served. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service of documents at the record

address of the party is fully effective

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HOWARD DONTUS LAROYCE

LEONARD,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-2711 DFL EFB P

vs.

G. SALAS, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Respondents.

 /

Petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus was dismissed and his application to

proceed in forma pauperis was denied, without prejudice, on December 13, 2006. The court

ordered petitioner to, within 30 days, either pay the filing fee or submit a proper application for

leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and to file an amended petition. The court warned petitioner

that failure to comply with that order would result in a recommendation of dismissal. The 30

days have passed and petitioner has not complied with or responded to the court’s order.1

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 11-110.

/////

Case 2:06-cv-02711-JKS-EFB Document 7 Filed 02/21/07 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

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 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.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: February 20, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-02711-JKS-EFB Document 7 Filed 02/21/07 Page 2 of 2